Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Speed Limiters in cars...

  • 02-05-2007 02:47PM
    #1
    Ronan H
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,058 ✭✭✭


    Whats the deal with speed limiters in cars, as in, why are cars manufactured to be able to do such huge speeds when its not really necessary? Surely in terms of road safety it would be a good idea to have such things in cars and then there would be physically no way that people could drive at outrageous speeds, with the exception of people having them removed obviously. Does anyone have any more information about this?

    Limiter Head


«1

Comments

  • #2
    Owen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,683 ✭✭✭✭Owen


    Having a limiter in a car is a bad idea for so many reasons. It will increase the length of time to complete an overtake, and if for example, a driver who doesn't know it's fitted tries to overtake, and gets killed, then it's all academic.

    The people who complain about limiters not being fitted are generally the type of people who view cars as a-b transport utilities. The rest of us, who enjoy our cars just don't see the point.


  • #3
    McSandwich
    Closed Accounts Posts: 593 ✭✭✭McSandwich


    Head wrote:
    Whats the deal with speed limiters in cars, as in, why are cars manufactured to be able to do such huge speeds when its not really necessary? Surely in terms of road safety it would be a good idea to have such things in cars and then there would be physically no way that people could drive at outrageous speeds, with the exception of people having them removed obviously. Does anyone have any more information about this?

    Limiter Head

    The only way speed limiters could work effectively would be as part of a GPS controlled system. Otherwise a car limited to 150Km/h could still do a lot of damage in a 50Km/h zone.

    I think the real problem is that too many drivers have responsible driving limiters installed.


  • #4
    Marcus.Aurelius
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭Marcus.Aurelius


    EU market is quite diverse. Speed limits are virtually non-existent on autobahns in Germany. I've zipped along them at 160 kph +.

    As a country, we'd probably have to get all the importers to do it, but it would be shot down by the nay-sayers, me included!


  • #5
    peasant
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,819 ✭✭✭✭peasant


    Every car has a built in speed limiter !

    It's the bit that connects the steering wheel to the pedals :D


  • #6
    quarryman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,497 ✭✭✭quarryman


    is there a product out there will know what speed zone you are in and not necessarily force the car to slow down, but warn you instead?

    May be GPS system?

    I reckon i need one, i'm gonna get done doing 60kmh in 50kmh zone one of these days without realising.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Owen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,683 ✭✭✭✭Owen


    Most GPS units can be set to warn you if you exceed the speed limit. I've mine set to nag if I go 15kph over the limit. Or if herself's in the car, I get a slap. Both work equally well.


  • #8
    Ronan H
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,058 ✭✭✭Ronan H


    One of the insurance companies offers a discounted policy if you install a tracker for your speed. It might be the people who do the Ignition course, Hibernian?

    Tracker Head


  • #9
    Hellrazer
    Moderators, Arts Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,942 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hellrazer


    quarryman wrote:
    is there a product out there will know what speed zone you are in and not necessarily force the car to slow down, but warn you instead?

    May be GPS system?

    I reckon i need one, i'm gonna get done doing 60kmh in 50kmh zone one of these days without realising.


    The New Zealand government(I think it was NZ anyway) were toying with an idea like that a few years back where the system limited your speed depending on what "speed limit" was enforce in the area the vehicle was located.
    Dont think it ever came to much though.

    In my opinion it would be a good idea for "inexperienced" drivers or those with a certain number of penalty points to be fitted with some sort of system like the above.Most drivers on the roads are safe drivers.
    But those that are already proven to be "bad" drivers should be penalised by having it fitted.

    At this stage anything that saves life is worth it.


  • #10
    Sandwich
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭Sandwich


    peasant wrote:
    Every car has a built in speed limiter !

    It's the bit that connects the steering wheel to the pedals :D

    MOst of them seem to be faulty then.:rolleyes:


  • #11
    astraboy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,034 ✭✭✭astraboy


    What about if you take your car to a track day, or use your car for rally, drifting, or perhaps even a clerk of the course at a rally stage and you are limited to 100kph? If I spend money on a performance car then I may want to enjoy it at speeds now and again in a safe area. Why not just limit cars to 5mph the way your going on Head?:rolleyes: You seem to be obsessed with these speed related threads today. How about someone start a thread on driver training and testing, or road conditions? O yes, those bandwagons need far more insight to jump on I forgot. :) :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    bazz26
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 51,489 ✭✭✭✭bazz26


    In my opinion the driver should not need an electronic gadget to remind him/her that he/she is driving too fast.

    That is what good driver eduction and judgement is for imo. Unfortunately as the statistics show every week alot of drivers are generally lacking in both.


  • #13
    JHMEG
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,686 ✭✭✭JHMEG


    ned78 wrote:
    Most GPS units can be set to warn you if you exceed the speed limit. I've mine set to nag if I go 15kph over the limit. Or if herself's in the car, I get a slap. Both work equally well.
    That's providing the GPS system knows the local limit, and in the majority of cases both Navteq and Tele Atlas data is just plain wrong about speed limits in this country (the local authorities have no obligation to inform them of limits, or of changes to speed limits).

    Another problem is inappropriate speed limits. When we switched to metric limits the Leitrim Observer carried a photograph on the front page of a boreen, complete with tall grass growing in the middle (you know the type) that had 100km/h limit signs!:eek:

    There is no substitue for common sense, and of being aware of the local limit.

    Breaking the limit is an offence. If you can't overtake safely without breaking the speed limit, don't overtake.


  • #14
    MarkN
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,458 ✭✭✭MarkN


    The AMOUNT of money the government would lose in VRT and VAT if they brought something like this in. Nobody would buy fast and expensive cars anymore...

    I'd say you've two chances of it happening.


  • #15
    Captain Slow IRL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,651 ✭✭✭Captain Slow IRL


    peasant wrote:
    Every car has a built in speed limiter !

    It's the bit that connects the steering wheel to the pedals :D
    :rolleyes:
    Limiters should be compulsory with learner drivers - a lot of them just don't have any comprehension of speed.

    I wonder if that silver ferrari had a limiter............:D


  • #16
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 42,304 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    What would you limit them to? 50km/h?
    Would you then complain if you got stuck behind one on one of our National Routes or would you stand by them and say how they have every right to use the road even if they block traffic?
    What happens to the limiter if its a family car and the learner drivers parent who owns the car wants to use it? Would you allow them to disable it?


  • #17
    Captain Slow IRL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,651 ✭✭✭Captain Slow IRL


    100kmph
    I don't mind being stuck behind someone who is keeping it around this speed (if I see an "L" plate in a car, I give them space and overtake if necessary)
    Parental lock?! - you can get it on computers and dvd players..........


  • #18
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 42,304 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Whats the point in that?
    You propose to limit drivers to the national speed limit that nobody is allowed cross anyway unless on a motorway (where L-drivers are not!).
    So in effect they aren't limited at all and could still drive at that speed up grafton street on a saturday afternoon!

    As for parental lock - are you pissed?


  • #19
    bazz26
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 51,489 ✭✭✭✭bazz26


    land9 wrote:
    :rolleyes:
    Limiters should be compulsory with learner drivers - a lot of them just don't have any comprehension of speed.

    In fairness excessive speeding and general bad driving is not just limited to learner drivers.


  • #20
    Captain Slow IRL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,651 ✭✭✭Captain Slow IRL


    drivers with less than 2 years experience are most likely to be involved in an accident and the majority of accidents are attributed to speed - limiting speed with inexperienced drivers should be introduced in this country.

    end of discussion.


  • #21
    Owen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,683 ✭✭✭✭Owen


    land9 wrote:
    :rolleyes:
    Limiters should be compulsory with learner drivers

    So, if you limit speed, they're supposed to learn ... how?


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Del2005
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,166 ✭✭✭✭Del2005


    Theres no need for limiters just use R or P plates like Oz,NZ and up North. Easy for the Gardai to see if you're over the limit and if the do get caught have higher fines/less points for them.

    Speed limiters won't work, look at all the Jap import cars that have the 180km/h limiters. They are nearly all removed before people drive them. Then you would have the fact that if cars are limited and if people remove the limiters the Gardai can't catch them. Remember the new Ambulance last year that was restricted to 85km/h and they had to send a 2nd Ambulance to get the kid to hospital. That was an offical goverment ambulance and health and safety wouldn't let then remove the limiter, why would they let the Gardai remove it?

    Also you can do just as much damage at slow speed as fast speed, it just takes longer;)


  • #23
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,655 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Del2005 wrote:
    Also you can do just as much damage at slow speed as fast speed, it just takes longer;)
    Glib, not very funny and downright wrong.
    For example, a 5km/h difference in your speed could be the difference between
    life and death for a vulnerable road user such as a pedestrian.
    Hit by a car at 60 km/h, 9 out of 10 pedestrians will be killed.
    Hit by a car at 50 km/h, 5 out of 10 of pedestrians will be killed.
    Hit by a car at 30 km/h, 1 out of 10 pedestrians will be killed.
    Source RoSPA UK


  • #24
    Turbulent Bill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,641 ✭✭✭Turbulent Bill


    Hellrazer wrote:
    The New Zealand government(I think it was NZ anyway) were toying with an idea like that a few years back where the system limited your speed depending on what "speed limit" was enforce in the area the vehicle was located.
    Dont think it ever came to much though.

    In my opinion it would be a good idea for "inexperienced" drivers or those with a certain number of penalty points to be fitted with some sort of system like the above.Most drivers on the roads are safe drivers.
    But those that are already proven to be "bad" drivers should be penalised by having it fitted.

    At this stage anything that saves life is worth it.

    Something like the NZ system would be a good idea, I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult to implement if the local authorities provided proper limit information to the GPS companies.

    Adaptive speed limits will probably come into force, especially given the carnage on the N7/N9 recently, and in this case a limiter/notifier system could be very useful. Plenty of people are extremely poor at reading road conditions, and take the speed limit as their only guide.


  • #25
    peasant
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,819 ✭✭✭✭peasant


    A speed limiter that works either to a fixed value (say 80 kmh) or is adapted via GPS or whatever to the actual local limit at the time is a hare-brain idea.

    three reasons:
    No matter what the speed is limited to ...you can still go too fast for the conditions and might need to stay well under the limit ...fog being a prime example.

    There are circumstances where only a decisive step onto the loud pedal will get you out of a sticky situation ..on-ramps on motorways / dual carriageways are such a place where sometimes you just need to move out of the way (of a thick headed merger that has no concept of safe spacing and distances and just ploughs in regardless) and braking is not the safest option ...if your already at the limit and your limiter kicks in while you're trying to get away ... crunch !

    People will drive stupidly anyway ...they will try and overtake others that are 10 km/h under the limit, pull out, accelerate (or rather not) and suddenly find that they're limited to crawling alongside that big, long artic with no way out, no way back and traffic coming round the next distant bend.


  • #26
    Stark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,142 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    land9 wrote:
    :rolleyes:
    Limiters should be compulsory with learner drivers - a lot of them just don't have any comprehension of speed.

    I wonder if that silver ferrari had a limiter............:D

    "Congratulations, you've passed. Now you get to break all the speed limits you want".


  • #27
    Turbulent Bill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,641 ✭✭✭Turbulent Bill


    peasant wrote:
    A speed limiter that works either to a fixed value (say 80 kmh) or is adapted via GPS or whatever to the actual local limit at the time is a hare-brain idea.

    three reasons:
    No matter what the speed is limited to ...you can still go too fast for the conditions and might need to stay well under the limit ...fog being a prime example.

    There are circumstances where only a decisive step onto the loud pedal will get you out of a sticky situation ..on-ramps on motorways / dual carriageways are such a place where sometimes you just need to move out of the way (of a thick headed merger that has no concept of safe spacing and distances and just ploughs in regardless) and braking is not the safest option ...if your already at the limit and your limiter kicks in while you're trying to get away ... crunch !

    People will drive stupidly anyway ...they will try and overtake others that are 10 km/h under the limit, pull out, accelerate (or rather not) and suddenly find that they're limited to crawling alongside that big, long artic with no way out, no way back and traffic coming round the next distant bend.

    I don't think it's that mad an idea. The adaptive limits should cater for poor conditions - this is one of the reasons for their use. I accept that sometimes you need to put the foot down to get out of a situation, but is usually a question of acceleration rather than outright speed. How often can you really do 120km/h in a motorway driving lane anyway (with traffic, road conditions etc.)?

    People will continue to do stupid things at or below the speed limit, but why not limit their exposure to speed-related problems? Would you chance overtaking if you knew that you could only gain (at most) 10km/h?


  • #28
    Stark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,142 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    Turbulent Bill wrote:
    How often can you really do 120km/h in a motorway driving lane anyway (with traffic, road conditions etc.)?

    I get to do 120km/hr in the driving lane on most motorways, even stretches of the M50 when it's quiet.


  • #29
    Marcus.Aurelius
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭Marcus.Aurelius


    Speed limiters in cars is a silly idea, if there were any accidents where cars failed the overtake because of the limiter, the importing company would be liable. Its too dangerous in itself!


  • #30
    blastman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,451 ✭✭✭blastman


    land9 wrote:
    drivers with less than 2 years experience are most likely to be involved in an accident and the majority of accidents are attributed to speed - limiting speed with inexperienced drivers should be introduced in this country.

    end of discussion.
    Hoping to get elected on May 24th? You'd make a fine TD.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    layke
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,956 ✭✭✭layke


    Land9 thinking restricting people will solve all of your problems is pointless, it won't. Your idea seems to me like a quick fix when we should be concentrating on how best to teach younger people how to drive correctly. What you should do if you feel the back end of your car sliding out, emergency braking procedures, driving in rain... none of this is covered.

    I don't think you'll meet anyone else who has the same contempt for the driving test in Ireland as I do. It is a stupid test to see if you can drive like a granny for a day not how people actually drive.

    If my car is allowed to go 80/100 KM/h I can still whip it around a corner at that speed, restricter won't help much there will it.


  • #32
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,190 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    There's a fine line between protecting people "for their own good", and forcing people to bend to the will of the control freaks.

    Big large butcher knives are sold over the counter. Some are used to kill people. Most aren't. People can buy guns. Some are used to kill people, most aren't.
    Denying people the right to make the right decision just creates resentment and resistance. Give someone the chance to make the right decision, and you'll find that largely they do. Remove someone's ability to make that choice and more often than not they'll resist or otherwise deliberately force the wrong choice in protest.

    Speed limiters are akin to DRM software - attempting to limit people's right to make their own choices.

    GPS trackers have shown some small success, especially with younger drivers. The main thing that people don't like is the big brother idea - people still feel as if they're being forced to make choices. I think GPS systems which told you when you have exceeded the limit would actually have the biggest effect - similar to what new78 uses. The driver keeps their right to make the choice, but is reminded every so often of the choice that they've made. :)


  • #33
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 42,304 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    land9 wrote:
    the majority of accidents are attributed to speed
    I think you are confusing speed with inappropriate speed.
    Inappropriate speed encompasses driving within the speed limit!
    Stop listening to political soundbites!


  • #34
    Marcus.Aurelius
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭Marcus.Aurelius


    kbannon wrote:
    I think you are confusing speed with inappropriate speed.
    Inappropriate speed encompasses driving within the speed limit!
    Stop listening to political soundbites!

    Exactly right. Get over yourselves, lunatic lefties.:D


  • #35
    Gatster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,413 ✭✭✭Gatster


    Everyone has the right to buy what they want, if they can afford it. The 'Gentlemens Agreement' between the German manufacturers (except Porsche) is just that, I'm not sure of the reasoning behind it as 155mph is pretty fast. Head seems to be excessively interested in the speed of others, see here


  • #36
    peasant
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,819 ✭✭✭✭peasant


    slightly OT ...but here it goes anyway ...

    Anyone rember driving before the conversion to km/h?
    Remember how few speed limit signs there were in those days?
    Practically none.

    Dangerous spots got a "slow" "slower" signage ...and after that it was up to the driver and the national speed limit which was the same everywhere.

    No, I'm not saying that nobody was eceeding the limit then, because people were ...but, overall I think the standard of driving was better then, than it is now.

    What has happened with the changeover is that speed limit signs have sprung up in every spot imaginable and to my mind that has resulted in a sort of "reverse psycholgy" effect. Whereas before you drove as fast or slow as conditions allowed, these days people seem to drive at whatever speed the sign says and take that as a target.

    Problem is though that whoever put up the signs did not put one bit of thought into it. We all know the single lane, overgrown borreen with the 80 sign.
    Much worse though are the countless places where the old "Slow-slower" signs are accompanied by 100 signs ...one more or less negating the other.

    Outside the place where I live is a twisty, narrow, bendy N road (on average 1 accident per week:eek: )
    You leave the village, a biiig sign says "slow, dangerous bends" accompanied by a 100 sign. A few hundred meters down the road, having negotiated the first hairy bend you come to a straight strech with an even more dangerous blind bend behind it ...recognising the amount of accidents there, some bright spark decided that this would be the right place fo another 100 sign! (do 80 there and you're off ...fact!)

    What compounds the situation IMO are the "shooting fish in a barrel" setups on perfectly straight and safe dual carriageways. These checks are there to "educate" the driving population into watching their speed at all times.
    But not actually watching their speed, but their speedos, in order not to get caught doing 60 where it says 50 for no apparant reason.

    IMO that kind of behaviour longterm has the reverse effect in that people will actually do 80 where it says 80 and 100 where it says 100. After all, they're not speeding, are they?

    Now combine that with the absolutely lethal signposting (as mentioned above) and you've got a recipe for accident after accident ...and no one was ever "speeding" ...they were just going too fast.

    The authorities shrug their shoulders, blame "speeding", more speed cameras go up on another dual carriageway (so somebody is seen to be doing something) and the merry circle continues.

    And now some even brighter sparks want to introduce speed limiters, making the existing mess even bigger ....


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Turbulent Bill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,641 ✭✭✭Turbulent Bill


    seamus wrote:
    There's a fine line between protecting people "for their own good", and forcing people to bend to the will of the control freaks.

    Big large butcher knives are sold over the counter. Some are used to kill people. Most aren't. People can buy guns. Some are used to kill people, most aren't.
    Denying people the right to make the right decision just creates resentment and resistance. Give someone the chance to make the right decision, and you'll find that largely they do. Remove someone's ability to make that choice and more often than not they'll resist or otherwise deliberately force the wrong choice in protest.

    Speed limiters are akin to DRM software - attempting to limit people's right to make their own choices.

    GPS trackers have shown some small success, especially with younger drivers. The main thing that people don't like is the big brother idea - people still feel as if they're being forced to make choices. I think GPS systems which told you when you have exceeded the limit would actually have the biggest effect - similar to what new78 uses. The driver keeps their right to make the choice, but is reminded every so often of the choice that they've made. :)

    That's fine if you're the only car on the road - your driving choices will only affect you. It's different when there are others involved. If we assume that a speed limit is set for a sensible reason (a big 'if' in Ireland), its job is to protect people "for their own good". Why not go along with automated enforcement of this?


  • #38
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 42,304 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    The only realistic way this would work is via GPS (with speed limit zones properly mapped).
    However, Im sure civil liberty campaigners would have something to say about it!


  • #39
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,190 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Because there's no such thing as a choice which affects only you. *All* choices affect other people, either directly or indirectly.

    We make laws to indicate to people what the correct choice is. But we don't force them to make it, only to pay for not making it. This is critical. You can't force people to do things, just so that it won't affect anyone else. Everything we do affects someone else. This is the way of the world, we have to just deal with it.

    The importance of choice as a basic human freedom is one of the things that millions of people have died for. We're going a little off the scope here, but this is what it comes down to. You cannot restrict people's freedom to choose. All you can do is help them make the right choice and if necessary punish them when they make the wrong one.


  • #40
    astraboy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,034 ✭✭✭astraboy


    layke wrote:
    Land9 thinking restricting people will solve all of your problems is pointless, it won't. Your idea seems to me like a quick fix when we should be concentrating on how best to teach younger people how to drive correctly. What you should do if you feel the back end of your car sliding out, emergency braking procedures, driving in rain... none of this is covered.

    I don't think you'll meet anyone else who has the same contempt for the driving test in Ireland as I do. It is a stupid test to see if you can drive like a granny for a day not how people actually drive.

    If my car is allowed to go 80/100 KM/h I can still whip it around a corner at that speed, restricter won't help much there will it.

    I totally agree with you man! The driving test is very outdated. Granted it was recently updated to include basic car maintenance(battery location etc) but how to back around a corner seems secondary to night driving, motorway driving, lane discipline etc. I took the hiberian ignition course and I was shocked at how 1 day could alter both my attitude and process of driving. I regularly use the techniques like the 2 second rule and how to properly observe whats happening ahead while driving. I had gotten 17 driving lessons over the course of the previous year to get insured and then to pass the test.

    Proper training and testing designed to prepare people for driving on the roads and conditions we have would be far better then some big brother scheme telling me I can't go 5kph over the limit passing out an artic.


  • #41
    Marcus.Aurelius
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭Marcus.Aurelius


    Good post from Astraboy. Those of us that enjoy driving strive to improve and hone our skills on the roads. Those on their mighty high horses are the drivers who never improve themselves and are part of the bigger accident problem.

    Perhaps I'm wrong, but speeding is not involved in the majority of road deaths. (please correct me if I'm wrong here, isn't it 40% of accidents are related to speeding)


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    galwaytt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,754 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    ....somoene pointed out yesterday that my steering wheel looked unusually 'worn' in two places, and what caused it.

    'Hands a ten-to-two', I replied.

    'Do you actually drive with both hands??' came the incredulous response

    'er, yes........':rolleyes:

    Ode To The Motorist

    “And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road” 



  • #43
    blastman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,451 ✭✭✭blastman


    So how do you eat your breakfast roll? :D


  • #44
    Marcus.Aurelius
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭Marcus.Aurelius


    galwaytt wrote:
    ....somoene pointed out yesterday that my steering wheel looked unusually 'worn' in two places, and what caused it.

    'Hands a ten-to-two', I replied.

    'Do you actually drive with both hands??' came the incredulous response

    'er, yes........':rolleyes:

    lol.... a little off the point but funny


  • #45
    astraboy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,034 ✭✭✭astraboy


    maoleary wrote:
    Good post from Astraboy. Those of us that enjoy driving strive to improve and hone our skills on the roads. Those on their mighty high horses are the drivers who never improve themselves and are part of the bigger accident problem.

    Perhaps I'm wrong, but speeding is not involved in the majority of road deaths. (please correct me if I'm wrong here, isn't it 40% of accidents are related to speeding)
    Cheers man. I think I read a while back that a study in Britian showed that people breaking the speed limit was the cause or factor in something like just 2% of accidents!:eek: The major cause was people driving under the limit, but at INAPPROPRIATE SPEED for the conditions. So people can stick to the limits all they want accidents will still happen and road deaths will continue unless people learn and are thought how to judge a correct speed to progress.


  • #46
    Captain Slow IRL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,651 ✭✭✭Captain Slow IRL


    what about a limiter integrated with gps to ensure the car goes at the limit then?!?:D

    good point about education - I learned a lot from the hibernian ignition course; little things that I had never considered but were blatantly obvious when pointed out to me


  • #47
    maidhc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,726 ✭✭✭maidhc


    Why can't this forum be about cars and stuff, and not sound like Joe Duffy on steroids. :(


  • #48
    unkel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 66,442 ✭✭✭✭unkel


    maidhc wrote:
    Why can't this forum be about cars and stuff

    This forum is about cars and stuff. All opinions are allowed though. Even opinions that you and me would consider to be ridiculously silly ;)

    Lotus Elan turbo for sale:

    https://www.adverts.ie/vehicles/lotus-elan-turbo/35456469

    My ads on adverts.ie:

    https://www.adverts.ie/member/5856/ads



  • #49
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 42,304 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    unkel wrote:
    Even opinions that you and me would consider to be ridiculously silly ;)
    Well thats just silly then! :D


  • #50
    Ronan H
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,058 ✭✭✭Ronan H


    Gatster wrote:
    Everyone has the right to buy what they want, if they can afford it. The 'Gentlemens Agreement' between the German manufacturers (except Porsche) is just that, I'm not sure of the reasoning behind it as 155mph is pretty fast. Head seems to be excessively interested in the speed of others, see here

    Relax will ya, this was just a genuine query that i had very little information about and wanted to get peoples opinions on, and had never thought about much before. Granted it was in my head due to the other thread but not related in terms of my feelings, it was merely an information and opinion seeking thread...

    Merely Head


  • #51
    nastysimon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 118 ✭✭nastysimon


    land9 wrote:
    good point about education - I learned a lot from the hibernian ignition course; little things that I had never considered but were blatantly obvious when pointed out to me

    No offence, but if it taught you a lot, you should question how much you knew beforehand and still know. I did the course and was quite disappointed with it, most of it was either obvious (even before I did the course) or very obscure (stuff which you'd only know if you read their material).

    My opinion is that to get a license one should have to do a different test, the IAM one would be about the right level.

    Anyway, back to the point, almost. There is a much easier way to save lives than limiting the speed that cars can do (adaptively or not), just take all the bad drivers off the road. Change the system so that everyone has to resit the test every five years and make the test the IAM one. You'll probably find the number of deaths goes down to somewhere between 1% and 5% of the current rate (this is a simple estimate by me, no strong statistical basis to back it up).


  • Advertisement
Advertisement