| Author | Post |
|---|
karTER
Moderator
|
Posted: Fri Nov 3rd, 2006 02:52 pm |
|
| Some rather novel and interesting thoughts there.
____________________
I have learnt my best dance moves from this little fellah:----->>>  And now the burds can't keep their hands off me...
|
bedlam
Forum Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 13th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 112 |
| Occupation: | | | My bikes: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 3rd, 2006 06:12 pm |
|
I'd have a cross hatched section running for a mile or so to allow correct lane access and if not in in time, ZAP! 
LOL!! my lass wouldnt make it off the slip road!
a 998cc micra! , but she got 97mph out of it on the way back from perenporth last year!
good lass
|
chrisfell
Forum Member
|
Posted: Fri Nov 3rd, 2006 06:28 pm |
|
Until I got a satnav (portable, clips on the 'bars and the car's screen) I only had an inkling of my actual speed. I knew that the Zed's speedo was out - reading fast. I knew that all my previous cars were optimistic too, but not by how much. One of the tricks I used was to follow a tesco/sainsburys/morrisons truck. These are all governed to 56. Simply follow and watch the speedo.
Getting satnav took the guessing out of it. The Zed and all cars up to the last one were between 8 and 10% out. In some cases this was because of changes to the tyres - my E wears modern low profile rubber, full profile tyres being as rare as rocking horse turds - but mainly it seems to have been a deliberate design feature.
So given that we are allowed to drive with speedos whose accuracy must be within the range +/- 10% plus 3kph, and plod (sorry, Safety Camera Partnership, hahahahahahaha) tends to set his fixed cameras at the posted limit plus this tolerance, that means the maximum safe (from prosecution) speed is bwteen 86 and 87 on my bike!
I dont think it'll work as an argument in court though. And as I'm still nursing three points on my licence from an indiscretion three years ago with the prospect of a clean licence again soon, I'll not be testing this theory.
Chris
|
f0uloli
Forum Member
|
Posted: Fri Nov 3rd, 2006 09:26 pm |
|
The difference between speedo and real speed is dependant on the vehicle. Most of my bikes have been well out 10% out is the norm - but my old Merc was only 2 mph out at 100 mph
____________________
F0ul Oli
Insert funny comment here!
|
hairnet600
Forum Member
| Joined: | Fri Jan 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Baku, Azerbaijan |
| Posts: | 14 |
| Occupation: | champ lazyget | | My bikes: | 99,05 Hornet 89 CBR6 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 10:03 pm |
|
i don my best to keep to 30 and 40 limits (if i was perfect i wouldnt be sitting here lol)
but anything over 50 is fair game depeding on the circumstances
i dont think its the speed limits that cause accidents solely (although they are a factor) - its the myopic twats in cars and bikes (is anyone here a saint) that havent done an ounce of training siince they passed the (vastly inadequate) test
its that that needs to be overhauled in a huge way not limits
IMO
____________________
is it time for a ride yet..........?
|
dunkydoda
Forum Member
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 10:37 pm |
|
| ! Last edited on Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 10:40 pm by dunkydoda
____________________
It's not the getting there that counts... it's how many cars you piss past on the way!
http://www.justgiving.com/riderstorussia
|
dunkydoda
Forum Member
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 10:39 pm |
|
dunkydoda wrote: We had a very similar discussion a while back about speed not killing etc etc
I presented some man maths (the type you can use at any point in your life to prove beyond doubt you can always afford the new car/bike/boat/house/wife) about reation times and the distance travelled. It does make you really think when you know that at 100 you have travelled 800 meters for instance before your brain even registers there might be a problem ahead. I'm too tired now to go away and work it out but I'm off sick at the mo so tomorrow expect graphs and everything.
But...
How can we really have a problem with 30 in town? I don't and therefore stick to it almost religiously.
40's 50's 60's can be met or ignored depending how brave you are feeling but if you take most speed limits off roads people tend to stick to them anyway +/- 20%. There is always some twat that will piss along at 140+ and I'm afraid I am he at certain times.
70mph does seem very slow now and is almost totally ignored. Did you know that the Highways Agency actually doctors the miles to next junction average times on their motorway signs because most of them read over the limit when not in "rush" hour.
If you can have lower limits for trucks why not higher ones for certain engine sized cars and bikes? A 998cc Micra going at 97 (see above) is so much less safe than a 3.2 Audi A6 because it isn't designed to work at those speeds, the suspension and brakes aren't up to it. However a big engined larger saloon/sports car can happily tank along at 100+ well within its design limits.
I ride my Blackbird at 80-120 most of the time, 90 is the new 70 right? Its comfortable and so am I but I wouldn't want to be on an ER6 or some other slightly budget 600 or anything more than 20 years old because they would be at the absolute limits of their capability even though I know I could ride so much faster.
Raise the limit but make the penalties for breaking them harsher. More than 30% over the limit ban for life and crush the vehicle! That would make you stick to it.
____________________
It's not the getting there that counts... it's how many cars you piss past on the way!
http://www.justgiving.com/riderstorussia
|
dunkydoda
Forum Member
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 10:39 pm |
|
| Bollocks quote and edit button too close!
____________________
It's not the getting there that counts... it's how many cars you piss past on the way!
http://www.justgiving.com/riderstorussia
|
PaulR
Forum Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 8th, 2006 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 8404 |
| Occupation: | | | My bikes: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 10:44 pm |
|
chrisfell wrote: Until I got a satnav (portable, clips on the 'bars and the car's screen) I only had an inkling of my actual speed. I knew that the Zed's speedo was out - reading fast. I knew that all my previous cars were optimistic too, but not by how much. One of the tricks I used was to follow a tesco/sainsburys/morrisons truck. These are all governed to 56. Simply follow and watch the speedo.
Getting satnav took the guessing out of it. The Zed and all cars up to the last one were between 8 and 10% out. In some cases this was because of changes to the tyres - my E wears modern low profile rubber, full profile tyres being as rare as rocking horse turds - but mainly it seems to have been a deliberate design feature.
So given that we are allowed to drive with speedos whose accuracy must be within the range +/- 10% plus 3kph, and plod (sorry, Safety Camera Partnership, hahahahahahaha) tends to set his fixed cameras at the posted limit plus this tolerance, that means the maximum safe (from prosecution) speed is bwteen 86 and 87 on my bike!
I dont think it'll work as an argument in court though. And as I'm still nursing three points on my licence from an indiscretion three years ago with the prospect of a clean licence again soon, I'll not be testing this theory.
Chris
The rule for speedos isn't +/- 10%. Speedos are permitted to over-read by up to 10%, but aren't allowed to under-read at all.
____________________
Your advert here
|
dooley
Forum Member
| Joined: | Sat Jun 2nd, 2007 |
| Location: | London, United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 4009 |
| Occupation: | 3rd rate shamus | | My bikes: | CBF600CTDi |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 10:53 pm |
|
dunky - like you say, at higher speeds the main consideration is reaction times. which are the same at a given speed no matter what vehicle you're in (hough i'd probably be a bit more on the ball driving a micra at 97 than i would be in a porsche)
you also seem to be saying that you should have had your own bike crushed?!
____________________
"And I wonder how long I'll hang around
Before I go insane
Before I break down
And get gone again"
|
PaulR
Forum Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 8th, 2006 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 8404 |
| Occupation: | | | My bikes: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 11:23 pm |
|
BTW - how come this ancient thread has risen from the grave? It runs out of steam in 2006, then suddenly, two years later, it's back. Dear God - do people really trawl through two-year old threads?
____________________
Your advert here
|
Dresda
Forum Member
| Joined: | Fri Jun 27th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 233 |
| Occupation: | | | My bikes: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 11:54 pm |
|
The 70mph limit on Motorways/Dual carriageways was introduced as I recall, to reduce fuel consumption. I remember doing Leeds to London in under two hours, when the black diagonal on white circle meant 'de-restricted', ie, you could legally drive at any speed, even on some urban roads which are now 30 and 40 limits. Most roads had either a 30 limit or no limit. It then 'morphed' into a misguided safety measure. Urban speed limits are fine, and anyone driving at significantly more than 30 in a 30 limit deserves all they get in my view, but I will never be convinced that a vehicle in good condition, being well driven at high speed on an empty motorway on a summer morning constitutes dangerous driving. Sadly, many drivers are plain dangerous at any speed, so the rest of us get penalised by the 'lowest common denominator' system, which is why we are now restricted to a legal 60mph, on some of our favourite roads, where much higher speeds would be perfectly safe when navigated by competent riders/drivers. In (rare) defence of the rozzors however, they don't seem too bothered by vehicles being well driven at 90 on motorways, and thats the truth! A driver since the 60's, I have averaged 35.000 miles a year since my early twenties, much of it on motorways, and I reckon that unless driving like a pratt, then 90 is viewed as ok.
Having said all that, I often shudder when recalling the de-restricted stretches of road which I still use daily, and which are now 40 limits, where I used to get a variety of Gold Stars, Bonnevilles and G12's etc close to flat out. If we had had more 'extra urban' 40 limits in those days, a lot more of my old mates might be still alive.
Last edited on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 09:22 am by Dresda
|
nickwiz
Forum Member
| Joined: | Wed Sep 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Brum, United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 1175 |
| Occupation: | lay about | | My bikes: | Triumph Daytona 955i se |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 01:55 am |
|
Im not saying anything. I might get called a C*** again !
____________________
It takes a better rider to make an old bike go fast than a modern bike go slow.
|
workshirk
Forum Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 05:06 am |
|
karTER wrote: georgietheboy wrote: I think Montana used to be limit free...
Is that a country? 
It's big enough! And with only a million people living here/there there's loads of room for going fast. And unlike many states they don't have ridiculously low limits as soon as the roads start to twist; 70 mph limits through, up and over the Rockie Mountains anyone???
____________________
Whether you think you can or think you can't, you're usually right
http://www.handcontheroad.blogspot.com
http://www.inspiralcoaching.com
|
Dresda
Forum Member
| Joined: | Fri Jun 27th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 233 |
| Occupation: | | | My bikes: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 03:25 pm |
|
karTER wrote: I've always had a theory about speeds on the motorway and lane discipline.
Inside lane for all vehicles with more than four wheels
Middle lane only for four wheels
Outside lane- two wheels only.
Instant death ray for transgressors. 
seems to me that bikes have had their own lane for ages. It's the gap between traffic in the two outer lanes.
|
PaulR
Forum Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 8th, 2006 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 8404 |
| Occupation: | | | My bikes: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 03:32 pm |
|
Filtering (at any speed, even through stationary traffic) - or 'lane-splitting', as the Americans call it - is illegal in Florida. Is this the case in other States, too, does anyone know?
____________________
Your advert here
|
bigbadmad
Forum Member
| Joined: | Fri Aug 11th, 2006 |
| Location: | Coventry, United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 4046 |
| Occupation: | Surfing forums | | My bikes: | Aprilia RSV1000, Suzuki GSF400 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 03:37 pm |
|
PaulR wrote: Filtering (at any speed, even through stationary traffic) - or 'lane-splitting', as the Americans call it - is illegal in Florida. Is this the case in other States, too, does anyone know?
Most of them, yes. California is one of the exceptions.
____________________
Nkosi Sikelel' iAfrika
|
bigbadmad
Forum Member
| Joined: | Fri Aug 11th, 2006 |
| Location: | Coventry, United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 4046 |
| Occupation: | Surfing forums | | My bikes: | Aprilia RSV1000, Suzuki GSF400 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 03:38 pm |
|
Oh and:
Attack of the Zombie thread! Braaaaaaaaaains.
____________________
Nkosi Sikelel' iAfrika
|
workshirk
Forum Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 05:24 pm |
|
PaulR wrote: Filtering (at any speed, even through stationary traffic) - or 'lane-splitting', as the Americans call it - is illegal in Florida. Is this the case in other States, too, does anyone know?
California is the only state that allows filtering but even then, there are restrictions; I'm not 100% sure but I believe you have to have done a certain amount of bike training and you have to have a certain level of medical insurance! As for the rest of the states; it is extremely frustrating to be sat in stationary traffic watching the lights change again and again as half a dozen V8 trucks burbble through the junction at a time. Also at road works bikes never seem to pull to the front whilst waiting; doing it gets all sorts of looks and makes for quite a guilt trip...
____________________
Whether you think you can or think you can't, you're usually right
http://www.handcontheroad.blogspot.com
http://www.inspiralcoaching.com
|
karTER
Moderator
|
Posted: Sat Jul 26th, 2008 04:24 am |
|
workshirk wrote: PaulR wrote: Filtering (at any speed, even through stationary traffic) - or 'lane-splitting', as the Americans call it - is illegal in Florida. Is this the case in other States, too, does anyone know?
California is the only state that allows filtering but even then, there are restrictions; I'm not 100% sure but I believe you have to have done a certain amount of bike training and you have to have a certain level of medical insurance! As for the rest of the states; it is extremely frustrating to be sat in stationary traffic watching the lights change again and again as half a dozen V8 trucks burbble through the junction at a time. Also at road works bikes never seem to pull to the front whilst waiting; doing it gets all sorts of looks and makes for quite a guilt trip...
I've never understood that- what's the point of having a bike if you can't filter?
____________________
I have learnt my best dance moves from this little fellah:----->>> And now the burds can't keep their hands off me...
|
Current time is 03:26 pm | Page:   1 2 3 4   |
|
