- Messages
- 7,407
- Name
- Lee
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I live in an urban area which is 20 mph, not far from a police station. Even the police don't do 20 mph....
I'd average that most people sit between 20-25 mph.
and help to keep the site free for all
Speed limiters to be fitted on all new cars by 2022
- Thread starter Mr Bump
- Start date
I live in an urban area which is 20 mph, not far from a police station. Even the police don't do 20 mph....
I'd average that most people sit between 20-25 mph.
- Messages
- 7,407
- Name
- Lee
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Fairly sure someone has already provided evidence to the contrary in an earlier post. But here is Confused.com's percentages.
5% for cars exceeding the speed limit
comparethemarket.com - Common Causes of UK Road Traffic Accidents
Discover the most common causes of accidents in the UK with many of these that could have been completely avoidable. Find out more at Compare the Market.www.comparethemarket.com
6% for excessive speed for the conditions.
The only mention of speed in the most frequent causes of accident is being unable to determine the speed or path of other vehicles, which has nothing to do with speeding.
As I said earlier, most of the driving 'issues' are down to incompetence, arrogance and stupidity.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
In 2018, 12.7% of fatalities in UK car accidents were a result of speeding.
The Ultimate List of United Kingdom Driving Statistics for 2024
Discover accurate UK driving statistics on road safety, drunk driving statistics and fatalities, teen and commercial driving, vehicle safety, and more. Car accidents by location, gender, age.
m.toptests.co.uk
Perhaps if you took me off ignore, you might actually learn something.
But then I was only put on ignore in the first place because you didn't like being told the truth.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That is one thing I have never understood, why do all speed limits have to end in a 0. Why can't they end in a 5?
Gremlin
Houdini
- Messages
- 17,792
- Name
- Ingrid
- Edit My Images
- No
I would imagine it's something to do with the speed dials on cars, they tend to be marked in 10 mph increments
- Messages
- 3,209
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Hum..... I still don't believe you understand the definition of "more" This might helpJust because an SUV has a lower rating than an equivalent year doesn't mean it is dangerous, it just a lower score. Most cars now achieve 5 star ncap ratings, some may score 90% another scores 85%, it doesn't make the lower scoring vehicle dangerous.
The 65% for the Leaf is easily found by searching for ncap Leaf rating on Google, just as it is for many other cars. If they have crash tested it, it will be on their site.
A BMW X3 SUV still has a 5 star rating.
The 2011 Leaf was tested in 2012, it also achieved a 5 star rating, but its pedestrian rating is lower than a 2017 BMW X3, So by your definition, your car must be dangerous, even more so infact.
Official BMW X3/X4 safety rating
Euro NCAP safety rating of the BMW X3-X4: detailed results, crash test pictures, videos and comments from expertswww.euroncap.com
Euro NCAP | 500 - Server Error
Ncap crash testing first started in 1997, they tested 7 cars, some achieving a 3 star rating. The Rover 100 (Metro) didn't fare too well and was awarded just 1 star. As I mentioned before, they didn't break down their star ratings into percentages like they do now, but they gave the Rover a 2 out of 4 star rating for pedestrians, which I assume to be in the region of 50%, and it was said to have fared better than average than other cars in that respect in 1997.
Euro NCAP | 500 - Server Error
Euro NCAP updates with newer test all the time. Comparing results across years is only valid if changes were small. Best learn to read results before referring to them
Euro NCAP | The stars explained | Euro NCAP assessment areas
When Euro NCAP tests a car, it is awarded a score from zero to five stars, based on how well it protects people and helps avoid accidents. Find out more.
A faster vehicle is always more likely to kill than a slower vehicle. (I refer you to the first link of this post if you are unsure what this means
)The point isn't speeding directly kills, it's just a saying, The meaning of that phase is: speeding increases chances of an accident becomes a fatal accident, this is simple physics (Newton's laws of motion). The stats you've provided doesn't disprove that point.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Whilst the 10mph increments are clearly marked with numbers and a line, the 5mph increments are also marked with a line for anyone having trouble judging midway between 10mph increments. Some speedometers go as far as marking 2.5 mph increments and 1mph increments.I would imagine it's something to do with the speed dials on cars, they tend to be marked in 10 mph increments
Last edited:
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Your original statement was that SUV's are dangerous because of their high grills.Hum..... I still don't believe you understand the definition of "more" This might help
Euro NCAP updates with newer test all the time. Comparing results across years is only valid if changes were small. Best learn to read results before referring to them
Your comparison methodology is flawed unless you can prove, as EuroNCAP website says, the updates between 2012 and 2017 had not affected the score.Euro NCAP | The stars explained | Euro NCAP assessment areas
When Euro NCAP tests a car, it is awarded a score from zero to five stars, based on how well it protects people and helps avoid accidents. Find out more.www.euroncap.com
A faster vehicle is always more likely to kill than a slower vehicle. (I refer you to the first link of this post if you are unsure what this means
The point isn't speeding directly kills, it's just a saying, The meaning of that phase is: speeding increases chances of an accident becomes a fatal accident, this is simple physics (Newton's laws of motion). The stats you've provided doesn't disprove that point.
I pointed out that passenger protection can be worse than that of a saloon car, it doesn't mean the vehicle is dangerous. Seems you need to look up dangerous. My understanding of more is fine as it was me that used it correctly in the first instance.
For someone with a degree, you do have a problem with applying simple logic.
My encap comparisons aren't flawed at all, it merely states that some cars may have crash avoidance systems which has affected the star system, it doesn't affect the damage or injuries that the car will do in the event of an accident.
Your use o Newton's law of physics doesn't really apply because it doesn't take into account the vehicle construction. As I have already pointed out, because of the way modern cars are constructed. Drop a 1kg metal weight on your head from a metre, it is going to hurt, now drop a 2kg sponge on your head, it's not going to hurt anything like the 1kg weight because it will absorb some of the energy within its self because of its softer construction. That is the difference between old and new cars as well as the better brakes, tyres and suspension, that cars now have compared to when braking distances were first set in the highway code as well as speed limits.
I didn't say speeding doesn't cause accidents, but you and a couple of others are under the assumption that speeding will cause accidents. Just because someone is speeding, it doesn't mean they will have an accident, nor does it mean that if they do have an accident it will result in fatality. You really do need to differentiate and apply data and statistics properly.
Last edited:
Pound Coin
Horatio Nelson
- Messages
- 4,878
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The result of introducing a 20mph is usually to lower the average speed a few mph, not get everyone to drive at 20.
D
Deleted member 49549
Guest
Take a look at the official documentFairly sure someone has already provided evidence to the contrary in an earlier post. But here is Confused.com's percentages.
5% for cars exceeding the speed limitcomparethemarket.com - Common Causes of UK Road Traffic Accidents
Discover the most common causes of accidents in the UK with many of these that could have been completely avoidable. Find out more at Compare the Market.
6% for excessive speed for the conditions.
The only mention of speed in the most frequent causes of accident is being unable to determine the speed or path of other vehicles, which has nothing to do with speeding.
Then look at the section
RAS50007
Casualties in reported accidents by contributory factor, casualty type and severity, Great Britain, 2019
Exceeding speed limit (15%)
Travelling too fast for conditions (10%)
So a quarter of all fatalities, 376 out of 1,502.
The highest contributing factor is
Driver/Rider failed to look properly
Which also accounts for 25% of fatalities.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Fairly sure it's to reduce the speed limit to 20mph. If you were caught driving through at 25mph, saying you thought the speed limit was just to reduce the average speed a few mph is going to get you off.
D
Deleted member 49549
Guest
You need to read the report again to see why it does not disagree with what I have said...Fairly sure someone has already provided evidence to the contrary in an earlier post. But here is Confused.com's percentages.
5% for cars exceeding the speed limitcomparethemarket.com - Common Causes of UK Road Traffic Accidents
Discover the most common causes of accidents in the UK with many of these that could have been completely avoidable. Find out more at Compare the Market.
6% for excessive speed for the conditions.
The only mention of speed in the most frequent causes of accident is being unable to determine the speed or path of other vehicles, which has nothing to do with speeding.
note that I replied to Lee’s comment
You make it sound like all road deaths are due to speeding.......
Where I said
It is certainly one of the most frequent factors.
- Messages
- 3,209
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I'll ignore the sly underhanded comment, it's not constructive at all.
I have never seen a the car morph into a sponge before impact? Have you?
The video I posted shows zero or very little deformation of vehicles when hitting dummy pedestrian.
Also, why are you singling out Mr Bump and myself by judgmentally car safety stats? I'd love to hear the reason behind this relation to this generalised discussion about speeds and vehicle safety.
It's just simple physics, if an object is moving faster and or heavier, it will transfer a lot more energy into the smaller, more vulnerable, object. Therefore it is more likely to do more damage to the vulnerable object.
Only way to disprove that first principle deduction is false in the real world is to produce evidence such as 30mph roads have lower fatality rate (percentage of accidents that were fatal) than 20mph roads. But I don't believe that is the case, ever. Would be interested to be proven wrong though.
No, my original comment was that the high grills were dangerous. The statement was backed up with American safety board's statistics regarding pedestrian fatality stats. In the article, it compared percentage of fatality of SUV against cars, showing SUV high grills were more dangerous.
The official ENCAP summary states result cannot be compared across years unless test hasn't vastly changed. You are saying 2012 and 2017 results can be compared, so you'll need to provide evidence that pedestrian testing between 2012 and 2017 hasn't changed, or your point hasn't got a leg to stand on.
I have never seen a the car morph into a sponge before impact? Have you?
The video I posted shows zero or very little deformation of vehicles when hitting dummy pedestrian.
Also, why are you singling out Mr Bump and myself by judgmentally car safety stats? I'd love to hear the reason behind this relation to this generalised discussion about speeds and vehicle safety.
Nor did anyone imply you said such thing. Nor did I say or imply speed will cause accidents or it will result in fatality.
It's just simple physics, if an object is moving faster and or heavier, it will transfer a lot more energy into the smaller, more vulnerable, object. Therefore it is more likely to do more damage to the vulnerable object.
Only way to disprove that first principle deduction is false in the real world is to produce evidence such as 30mph roads have lower fatality rate (percentage of accidents that were fatal) than 20mph roads. But I don't believe that is the case, ever. Would be interested to be proven wrong though.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Just because driving too fast for the conditions has been included in that particular section, doesn't automatically mean speeding is a killer.
That could just as easily be included in the road environment/conditions, or driver error/inexperience sections.
Driver inexperience plays a big part in error of judgement, not just inexperience in their driving ability, but also their cars ability. As a result, they can drive too fast or too slow.
Also you have to factor in the car itself.
How good are it's tyres, just because they have 6mm of tread, doesn't mean they have better grip than a tyre that has a softer tread and only 3mm of tread. It is all about knowing your vehicle respecting it and knowing its capabilities.
The problem is motorists who just drive from A to B with no appreciation of what they are doing or why they are doing it.
It is still possible to exceed the speed limit and still drive safely.
D
Deleted member 49549
Guest
I have not said that it does.
The official statistics show that speed is a contributing factor in a quarter of road fatalities. So less speeding / excessive speed will reduce the 350 (every year!) fatalities. It will also mean that urban areas will become much more pleasant to live in without idiots acting like Ayrton Schumacher.
- Messages
- 9,805
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yes agree again, the people promoting road safety just seem to focus on speeding unfortunately
Although it is of course a factor if people just drove with care and attention road safety would improve massively
Relatively few accidents apparently are caused by equipment failure such as brakes
Pound Coin
Horatio Nelson
- Messages
- 4,878
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The key point.
And if people drive with care and attention (for other road users) they would often drive slower. And within limits, which brings us back to the thread topic...
If people disagree with the limit, get it changed. Limits are generally set to favour motorists anyway, 85% percentile, anyone?
Tringa
Numpty of the Day'
- Messages
- 6,138
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think we have been here before. I'm not entirely sure of people's intentions but it sometimes seems a case is being made that speed isn't that important in accidents.
While driver inattention appears to be the major cause and I don't think anyone would disagree with that, but the effects of speed are also clear. If through inattention you collide with a pedestrian the impact will be much worse if the speed is higher.
It is worth having a read of this from the Select Committee on Transport, Local Government and the Regions - https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmselect/cmtlgr/557/55705.htm
Dave
While driver inattention appears to be the major cause and I don't think anyone would disagree with that, but the effects of speed are also clear. If through inattention you collide with a pedestrian the impact will be much worse if the speed is higher.
It is worth having a read of this from the Select Committee on Transport, Local Government and the Regions - https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmselect/cmtlgr/557/55705.htm
Dave
- Messages
- 7,407
- Name
- Lee
- Edit My Images
- Yes
General comment - the trouble here is that the sort of person who currently drives at 35mph in a 20 zone is the exact same type of person who will switch the limiter off as soon as they get in the car.......
- Messages
- 3,209
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The thing is, speed is a major contributing factor in the seriousness of accident. The speed limits are generally set according to the chance of an accident to reduce seriousness of the accident, eg. rural country road with almost no one walking it will be set at NSL while busy road with shops are set to 30mph.
I don't believe anyone is under the illusion that speed have direct relationship to the number of accidents. But the saying "speed kills" have its reasons. (see end of my previous post)
Of course, reducing speed limit or (back to this thread) introducing always-on speed limiter does not automatically reduce number of accident, it may even increase it due to inattentive driver. But the point is to make exceeding the speed limit very obvious and harder to do without noticing.
- Messages
- 9,805
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yes absolutely see what you are both getting at speed is part of the issue and an accident at higher speed is more likely to be more serious but what I’m trying to say is that the focus should also be on dangerous driving
The guy in a BMW for example tailgating me on an A road may well be driving at the speed limit but it’s extremely dangerous driving
D
Deleted member 49549
Guest
There will be some no doubt. But if most cars are fixed at 20mph in urban areas that will be a significant benefit.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have already pointed out your video of a vehicle hitting a mannequin is not representative of hitting a proper crash test dummy which is constructed to replicate how a body would react. Whilst a human body may sustain injuries they don't fall apart like the mannequin did in the video. The fact the mannequin fell apart is why you didn't see any deformation in the vehicle. Even though you didn't see it, the front bumper will have deformed but they pop back into shape which is what they are designed to do when absorbing the impact.
The 1kg metal weight compared to a 2kg foam weight although overly exaggerated, was just to highlight the difference in being hit by an old lighter car, and a heavier modern car which has better crash protection for occupants and pedestrians. As I keep saying, although cars have increased in weight, their stopping and handling capabilities are far superior to the older models, so the fact they are heavier plays little consequence in like for like brake test and handling comparisons. For a modern car to do as much or more damage than an older car, it would have to be going alot faster and brake a lot later than the old car.
In the Clarkson video, the 1960's Anglia weighs in at just 737kg.
The 90's equivalent medium family car Escort weighs 1042kg. The Anglia just about stopped at the Highway Code braking distance, the Escort although not the best in that comparison test, still stopped considerably quicker than the Anglia. We are now 20 years further on, tyre technology, suspension and brakes have all improved further still making the highway code braking distances obsolete.
The other video I posted also showed a not too recent car, not only stop way inside the highway code braking distance at 30mph, but it still did it at 40mph as well.
I haven't singled you and Bump out at all, it is just that I am aware of what cars you drive from other threads, so have been able to use them as an example for you to easily relate to. If it makes you feel less "singled out". here's the results that would encompass my car,
Official Ford Focus 2012 safety rating results
Discover the Euro NCAP Ford Focus 2012 safety assessment: detailed results, crash test picture, videos & comments
www.euroncap.com
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Whilst there is evidence of 52% of motorists breaking 30mph speed limits, 2/3rds of them are still below 35mph. So unless you encounter the other 1/3rd you are seldom going to notice the 2/3rds who are speeding.
The standard allowance on a car speedometer is + or - 10% + 1mph. This is to allow for tyre wear. So technically a car travelling at 34mph is not breaking the speed limit, nor is it antisocial.
A lot of people have no real perception of speed, they think a car is travelling fast or breaking the speed limit when it isn't. I have had people waving at me to slow down in a 30mph speed limit, all because my car accelerates quickly and is noisier than average cars, it doesn't automatically mean that I am or will be exceeding the speed limit.
Pound Coin
Horatio Nelson
- Messages
- 4,878
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The focus should be on various things, including what:
helps cause crashes
makes crashes worse
inappropriate speed is high on both these lists...
Nod
Tootles
- Messages
- 49,450
- Name
- Nod (UK)
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Pretty sure a speedo isn't allowed to under-report a speed by any margin.
How accurate is your car speedometer? | The Car Expert
- Messages
- 3,209
- Edit My Images
- Yes
So you are saying if both cars are made to weigh the same (putting sand bags in older cars) and tested crashing under same condition, there would be a difference to sensor laden crash test dummy (not the one shown in the video I posted).
I get it is certainly possible, given the amount of advances computer simulation and material science have brought to the table. But I'm not sure the actual amount is large enough to negate the weight increase over the years. That's just my personal get feeling, I've no way to know/prove either way.
Absolutely.
But how to ensure all cars are always driven sensibly? How to ensure vehicles are not driven by the few dangerous drivers? How to ensure the driver is always paying attention?
Robo-taxi?
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
But lack of observation and other factors are much higher, but because they are harder to prove, unless they cause an accident, they don't get penalised in any way.
D
Deleted member 49549
Guest
Just spent a little time looking at the stopping distances.
UK uses 0.68 seconds, which is apparently very optimistic. Testing seems to suggest 1.5s is a more reasonable number which is the time used in USA. Canada uses 2.5s reaction time!
Ps. I’ve been reading on my phone so haven’t been able to validate these figures yet. Will take a better look this evening.
None of which changes the fact that speed is a contributing factor in a quarter of all fatalities...
UK uses 0.68 seconds, which is apparently very optimistic. Testing seems to suggest 1.5s is a more reasonable number which is the time used in USA. Canada uses 2.5s reaction time!
Ps. I’ve been reading on my phone so haven’t been able to validate these figures yet. Will take a better look this evening.
None of which changes the fact that speed is a contributing factor in a quarter of all fatalities...
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
If the older car was the same weight as the newer car, the older car would still do more damage as it will be carrying more speed at the point of impact.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
If you want to be pedantic speed is the contributing factor is all fatalities in car accidents, unless due to heart attack or natural causes. Speed doesn't necessarily mean driving too fast.
- Messages
- 10,765
- Name
- Jonathan
- Edit My Images
- Yes
This is possibly the best thread ever.
W
whiteflyer
Guest
My car has a speed limiter, yes you can turn it on or off, for driving though a strange town is really good at stopping me creeping over the limit, does the road sign detection system get a right 100% no, but on the very odd occasion it gets it wrong you just flick the switch, and it's absolutely brilliant in those average speed limit 50mph motorway road works.
Someone pointed out your allowed a 10% error on your speedo, yes correct more than that could be an MOT failure, but if the cops catch you speeding I think your speedo reading will be irrelevant, over the limit is over the limit ( each police force has it's own allowable mph over before booking you)
Someone pointed out your allowed a 10% error on your speedo, yes correct more than that could be an MOT failure, but if the cops catch you speeding I think your speedo reading will be irrelevant, over the limit is over the limit ( each police force has it's own allowable mph over before booking you)
Last edited by a moderator:
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Fairly sure the speedo isn't even tested during an MOT. I've sat and watched all my cars have their MOT's for 40 yrs as well as my sons cars and my wifes car. The car only goes on rollers to test the brakes and even then they are only going slowly.
- Messages
- 18,340
- Edit My Images
- No
It is, but not for calibration.
- Messages
- 9,989
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Speedo's are checked to see if they work on an MOT.
Generally, the police only prosecute for 10% +2mph over the limit. This is to allow for speedo accuracy and your ability as a human to actually keep the vehicle at a constant speed.
Pound Coin
Horatio Nelson
- Messages
- 4,878
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It's not worth using generalisations like that in parts of Wales and Scotland.
- Messages
- 2,082
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Whilst a speed limiter might reduce the first figure, it will do nothing for the second. A driver could be driving at the speed limit and it could be too fast for the situation eg heavy fog, poor visibility, poor road conditions etc.
A few years back, I watched a documentary about speeding and they fitted a speed limiter to a car and filmed what drivers did. Turns out they paid less attention to the road because they didn’t to focus as much. Whilst some driver aids actually help with the job of driving, there is a danger some might enable complacency. Bearing in mind that the majority of accidents is down to driver error not (involving inappropriate or excess speed), we should focus on this. If people were very serious about reducing road fatalities, they would focus on the largest factor - the driver. Either mandatory retesting every 5 years, or ban all drivers in the first place.