What’s the real cost of an 80mph speed limit?

I agree. If some drive at 80 mph there has to be an unprecedented degree of lane discipline if less wasteful drivers are to drive safely, although it is clear that many drive at more than 70 or even more than 80 already. I doubt whether this proposal could be combined with other ideas such as allowing the hard shoulder to be used. There is also an increased risk of or greater impact from collisions with birds, deer, etc

Absolute rubbish (RSF) as most drivers break the speed limit now anyway so the increase in the limit would do nothing to change the status quo.

The more important issue to be tackled by braver government (instead of one pandering to the ever increasing needs of the human race to get from A to B quicker for no apparent reason) is to DECREASE to 20mph the current 30mph limit on all residential roads in order to save lives. Those who disagree may wish to explain their reasoning to anyone who has lost a child or relative in an accident who (research proves) could have been saved had speeds involved been lower. Everyone knows that speed limits, whether at the top or bottom end of the spectrum, are broken; the trick is to make the starting point high enough to be acceptable, but low enough to ensure that pedestrians are given a fighting chance. As for motorways, considering all arguments, I think the 70mph limit is just about right…

phew some difference in comments here but as most state, most drivers already exceed the legal limit and a good percentage that I encounter seem to prefer 80mph (not that they wouldn’t do more if the roads were clear I would wager)I have averaged around 70,000 miles per year for the past 5 years and used a 1.9TDi Audi A4. I had a couple of years racing to get every where in a hurry and averaged around 40mpg. For the past 3 years now I keep to around 60mph and average 56mpg (and on one run to Norwich from North Wales, I even managed 61mpg). Excellent return but, guess what? I still arrive at the same times as I did when speeding (speeding I said, not exceeding the speed limit) After using the M25 several times, in the variable speed limit areas, when the traffic is restricted to say 50mph or 60mph there never seems to be any traffic problems. Also, I am in favour of the chevrons on motorways (keep 2 chevrons apart) this does seem reduce tail gaters, not all but a lot of them and traffic flow seems to be improved. So, a reduction in collisions and fuel useage !!

Maybe we need to drop maximum arbitrary speed limits in favour of flexible ones that can be raised and lowered depending on conditions. On the one hand, it is often not safe to travel at 70 whereas there are times when it would make any impact on a persons safety if they chose to travel at 120, provided their car was designed for that kind of performance. I am one who finds speed limits annoying, not because they are too low, sometimes they are quite appropriate, its just that they are so arbitrary and they criminalise normal good honest people, that’s not justice.

Re. the comment ‘driving in an overtaking lane without actually overtaking causes no accidents’. In general I would agree but would also comment that: On a motorway when drivers insist that the ‘centre lane’ to be used at all costs (mostly so they are not over taken by someone else and then find a problem getting back into the centre lane) this very effectively reduces the motorway into a dual carriage way. An experience to share also: Whilst driving on the A3 (dual carriageway remember) coming into London from Guildford a couple of years ago, I approached the A3 and noticed that the left lane was completely empty for as far as I could see. The right lane was fairly busy but moving along at around 50 ish. I carried on in the left lane at 50, just keeping behind the last vehicle. More cars filled up the void behind the last car (none would pull in behind me. As the right lane started to slow, I carried on for about 1 mile, totally untroubled by any traffic at all. There was a gap of around 60 metres in the right lane and as I pulled alongside a Mercedes, the driver looked at me, shook his fist and accelerated hard (I am guessing, he thought I was going to pull into the gap in front of him) as he did so, he continued looking at me and, yes, you guessed, the BMW in front braked and captain Mercedes slammed into the rear of the Beemer. I admit to smiling to myself, sorry me Beemer but I smiled. I carried on in the left lane and pulled into Merton totally traffic free.I was at Tesco and watched the traffic all disappear and the blue light inevitable arriving. All because of not just one drivers greed and stupidity but EVERY driver in that right lane, you are ALL to blame. How much fuel was used crawling along that morning. How easily would it have been to, well, you all know the rest…………………

Even if the speed limit gets upped to 80mph, there’s nothing forcing people to drive at that speed if the don’t want to. If they’re driving a shed, can’t afford the extra fuel or whatever they can still drive at 70 or 55 (just as long as they don’t hog the overtaking lane)
I wonder if anyone has done any research on what %age of people in fact drive above the 70 mph limit now. Chances are its the same roads and the same people so all an 80 limit might mean is no speeding ticket for actually doing the same speed.
I agree. If some drive at 80 mph there has to be an unprecedented degree of lane discipline if less wasteful drivers are to drive safely, although it is clear that many drive at more than 70 or even more than 80 already. I doubt whether this proposal could be combined with other ideas such as allowing the hard shoulder to be used. There is also an increased risk of or greater impact from collisions with birds, deer, etc
Time efficiency is not only about saving money; it’s also about reducing time wasted while driving at an unnecessarily slow speed, resulting in increased time to other more interesting or productive tasks before and after a journey. Compare our low motorway speed limit with other European countries, most of which have fewer lanes and some of which have greater traffic densities.
Some police forces tolerate up to 90mph already, provided that the driver’s conduct is otherwise perfect. I doubt there would be any change in the current enforcement approach.
My employer charges me out to clients at £175 an hour, so IN THEORY spending an hour more with the client and an hour less in the car would earn my employer £175. But in reality…
The time saving, i.e. the costs involved, are trivial. On a typical journey I’d save no more than 15 minutes from an increase in the speed limit.
The amount of work I do for the client is usually fixed, so it just means I start and finish a little later.
The argument that “Many people break this law” is feeble. If murder were to become commonplace would that be an argument to repeal the laws on murder?
Driving in an overtaking lane without overtaking, whilst very annoying, creates no danger to other road users in the vast majority of cases. And if it did, I’m sure it will be covered by existing motoring laws. So there is no need for a specific offence, an offence which would be difficult to define precisely and difficult to enforce.
This report is base on the assumption that most people people actually obey the 70MPh speed limit. When any motorist will tell you this is clearly not so.
Try doing 70MPH in the ‘fast’ lane on a motorway, and count the seconds until you are flashed by someone 3 feet away from your rear bumper.
Remember a few years ago police were trying to ticket those doing 70MPH or under in the ‘fast’ lane for obstructing traffic.
Our motorway network already has to cope with people driving in excess of 80MPH, so to cite the inability of the system to cope with traffic moving at this speed is disingenuous to say the least.
The issue is not speed, our cars today are safer than ever, it is the human at the wheel that is the problem.
We don’t need mare safety measures for cars, we need safer people driving them.
As we all appear to have a stupidity gene, I believe as wavechange & other commenter’s do that we need to be able to govern the speed of our motor vehicles, for our own protection, after all we now have braking controls, so lets go the whole 9 yards on this.
I read a graphic novel some time ago, the theme was that drivers were unregulated and allowed to do as they saw fit on the roads, lets just say that it involved fitting weapons on the cars, detachable hub caps with land mines etc….
Agreed we need safer people, but that is just one part. A slow and hesitant driver is often just as dangerous as a fast and aggressive driver.
Also if you say all cars must have an automatic speed control then that penalises the poorer as everyone will have to get a brand new car, making motorways a high speed road for the elite.
There are many ideas floating around about how we can save all these deaths, but the simple fact remains that humans are pretty stupid overall. An 80mph limit on the motorway won’t make any difference to anyone either financially or from a safety point of view.
What is important is lane discipline and driver education as cars are extremely strong these days and if anything average speeds on all roads have been decreasing, lowering the risk of death even further.
Will we need new cars, or can we get away with an adjustment to the control systems of our modern cars to reduce the maximum speed?
Mercedes have governed their cars to 155MPH at least since 1981 [my SL was restricted back then], I have never bothered to find out how they did this, as I have never aspired to drive one anywhere near this speed.
I know after the war some hire car companies used to restrict vehicles to 30MPH, this was a mechanical adjustment.
Any knowledgeable mechanics out their who can tell us if this can or cannot be done ‘on the cheap’.
I do not agree with the max 20MPH in town, that can only be enforced by speed cameras on every road, and will add to our pollution problem, the only result will be more revenue raised by fines. An idiot doping 50MPH outside of a school would still be doing it no matter the speed limit.
The law says you should drive at the speed appropriate for the conditions, so under 5MPH is appropriate when passing schools and in busy high streets, and 30MPH may be appropriate at other times, only driver education can make our roads safer, not draconian legislation, which people will break at every opportunity.
30MPH is the maximum permitted speed, you do not have the right to drive at that speed.
If you want to stop accidents involving cars and pedestrians, ban cars from our cities.
This is not an off the wall idea, I do have a plan for car free towns that would solve a lot of our traffic problems.
Unless there are specific restrictions in place signposted at frequent intervals, all dual carriageway roads have a maximum speed for cars of 70 mph. This is convenient and easy to remember, and some of the modern dual-carriageway roads are designed to high standards. If there is a case for raising the limit on Motorways – and personally I am not persuaded – then I would strongly argue that the limit should remain at 70 mph on all-purpose dual carriageways. Many of these roads are not so well-designed as Motorways for the current speed limit with their tighter radius curves, gradients, roundabouts, offside exits, short acceleration/deceleration lanes at junctions, and absence of hard shoulders. The sighting distances for signs and the size of lettering are inferior to Motorway standards. The exits from these roads frequently involve rapid deceleration, steep gradients and sharp bends culminating in traffic signals. The all-purpose dual carriageways can usually also be used by vehicles prohibited from using Motorways, such as pedestrians, learner drivers, tractors and combine harvesters, and powered wheelchairs or mobility scooters. Raising the speed limit from 70 to 80 mph appears to be quite popular and the sort of thing that appeals to politicians. I just hope this will be thought through very carefully and that if road safety arguments do not prevail then deep consideration will at least be given to the fuel waste and pollution issues.