Speed limiters arrive for all new cars in the European Union

It was a big week for road safety campaigners in the European Union as Intelligent Speed Assistance (ISA) technology became mandatory on all new cars. The rules came into effect on July 7 and follow a 2019 decision by the European Commission to make ISA obligatory on all new models and types of vehicles introduced from July …

[John Robson]

Good

It's about time.

Speed limiter on a vehicle has been my first thing to check for a long time - no speed limiter, no purchase.

Shame that current cars seem to want to default to cruise control rather than a speed limiter.

[wolfetone]

Re: Good

What are you doing driving a vehicle you can't control the speed of?

[John Robson]

Re: Good

I can control the speed... in fact I often find that I'm going 1mph below the speed limit. But it's sufficiently easy to just let speed run away that a limiter makes for a much simpler driving process -

I rarely have to glance at the dash, because I *know* that I am not exceeding the limit, even when going down a hill the vehicle automatically uses regen to hold the speed to the relevant limit.

What are you doing complaining about a system that helps you not break the law?

What are you doing complaining about a system that doesn't actually stop you doing anything?

Is it because you're a habitual law breaker who doesn't care about the danger they pose to others on the road?

[wolfetone]

Re: Good

I passed my test in 2008. On average over that time I would do between 10,000 to 20,000 miles per year. I've driven in most countries, in my own car, in a hire car, on the right side of the road in the wrong side of the car. I've driven tiny hatchbacks and I've driven huge Luton vans.

Never in that time have I ever been pulled over, have I ever been flashed (by a camera, or person actually, pity), I've never spent 2 weeks worrying about a summons from the Police telling me I was driving too fast.

The only thing I can say about it, what I put this all down to, is that I am not a habitual law breaker. I drive the car to the limits put in front of me and I control the car 100% of the time. I look in front of me, I look around me, I keep an eye on my speed and I keep an eye on the speed limit.

If you need a machine to do that, then get a taxi. You are a danger to road users if you require assistance like that to control the vehicle.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

So this system will have exactly no effect on you whatsoever - in fact it will help, because it will make the roads safer with other people also sticking to the speed limits.

I've been driving alot longer than you, anywhere up to 35-40k miles a year - and yes, it's nice to have a second pair of eyes looking out for things.

"I control the car 100% of the time."

So you've disabled the ABS, ESP etc?

No, I didn't think so.

[nematoad]

Re: Good

So you've disabled the ABS, ESP etc?

What are those?

My 1998 Mini Cooper S does not have them, nor does the old 1996 Corsa I'm having to use whilst I rebuild my Mini.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

They're rather useful aids for control that have been common for decades.

Of course my friends Austin 7 doesn't have them either, but it doesn't have synchromesh either, which I suspect your vehicles do have - pandering to the lowest common denominator indeed. You shoudl be ashamed of such modern assistance in your cars.

[nematoad]

Re: Good

...it doesn't have synchromesh either

Well the Corsa does but the S does not. It has a five speed gear box from Jack Knight and as far as I can find out there wasn't enough room in the box for syncromesh on first and second gear, Not really a problem as you soon pick up double-declutching. The very rare six speed boxes have no syncromesh at all and have straight cut gears which makes for a fairly noisy ride.

Driving a original Mini is said to be the most fun you can have in a car on your own.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

"Driving a original Mini is said to be the most fun you can have in a car on your own."

And here we have the problem - the priority when driving on public roads is safety, not fun.

[jake]

Re: Good

I find my fun cars to be much safer (and more capable of getting out of your mindless way) than my more staid and boring cars.

Driving them keeps the mind focused on actually driving ... which is kind of important when one is driving.

[nematoad]

Re: Good

Are you being deliberately obtuse or do you just not get it?

Having fun in a Mini is not ignoring safety but enjoying the crisp handling, the response of the engine and the adhesion of the car on the road. My S has Sport pack 13" wheels and it goes round corners as if on rails. As it has a stage 3 head it has better than 86 bhp on tap, that might not sound like a lot but as the car only weighs 715kg curb weight that's more than enough to pin the speedo at its limit of 110 mph, achieved at the Knockhill racing circuit if you are curious, not on the public highway. See having fun and doing so in a safe and responsible manner can be done.

I take my own and everybody else's safety seriously. I've long outgrown any "boy racer" tendencies I might once of had but I still get enjoyment from using the skills I have picked up over many years and with my S I can do that and still be in full control of my car.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

"See having fun and doing so in a safe and responsible manner can be done." Of course it can, that's why I specified "on public roads".

Race tracks are a fine place to have fun in a car, and I have enjoyed track days.

But not on the road.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Good

"See having fun and doing so in a safe and responsible manner can be done." Of course it can, that's why I specified "on public roads".

Race tracks are a fine place to have fun in a car, and I have enjoyed track days.

Well.. there is the Nürburgring, which is FUN!. Especially as it's kind of a public road and the toll prohibits racing. As might driver's insurance. But it's an interesting place to find out how both car and driver handle at speed given the track.. I mean road layout. Lots of places to discover that although your car might be a comfortable cruiser, it wallows like a pig around the Pflanzgarten. The Boneyard is best avoided.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

Technically the ring is a public toll road, but practically it's a track.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good

>They're rather useful aids for control that have been common for decades

Great and save a lot of lives - but once the temperature drops (and ABS switches off as it's supposed to) I've noticed anyone who learned to drive post millennium has no idea how to stop their car without traction. Same with most driving aids - my daughter's learning at the mo with an instructor's car which handles throttle on clutch release, auto hold for hillstarts and a myriad of clever stuff. When I take her out in the Mrs ancient Fiesta she stalls and rolls back constantly - basically has to learn to drive. At some point this needs addressing in the same way as auto/manual gearing is.

[Montreal Sean]

Re: Good

My car has the hill assist too, and I can't stand it.

The hill assist has been responsible for stalls on hill starts that I would never have had if the assist was gone.

Electronic stability control is hit and miss, it activates at times that I would rather it not and causes the car to not do what I expected it to do which makes it more of a hindrance to me.

Traction control needs to be turned off frequently during the winter here, as it causes problems getting through deeper snow and going up inclines, because it kills the throttle if there is too much wheel spin.

I've been driving 32 years, driving 27k kilometers a year on average, mostly in manual small sedans, but also big old automatics from the 1970s, cube vans, RV...and I find that most of the new assists in cars just lull people into a false sense of security because " The car does it for me".

[Not Yb]

Re: Good

ABS doesn't switch off when the temperature drops. It doesn't work as well, sure, but it still can help in certain circumstances... so it does stay on.

[Randy Hudson]

Re: Good

Features that have been mandatory for 20 years. If you're that out of touch why are you commenting?

[SundogUK]

Re: Good

I don't even drive and I know this is bollocks.

[nematoad]

Re: Good

...why are you commenting?

1) Because I can.

2) It was genuine question. I've never come across the acronym ESP before and I was curious.

Finally what difference does it make to you if I happen to drive a clapped out old banger whilst I rebuild my rare and sought after Cooper S? They made 50 of that model and less than that were upgraded to a Sport 5. That's what I call a limited edition.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

"2) It was genuine question. I've never come across the acronym ESP before and I was curious."

https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/road-safety/what-is-esp-vehicle-safety-guide/

Seriously - top page of google results for "ESP car"

[Martin an gof]

Re: Good

First came to prominence (or public attention anyway) in the mid 1990s when the new Mercedes A-class was found to be a bit "top heavy" under certain conditions, and (IIRC) Mercedes recalled the lot to fit ESP (though I think they called it ESC?). There was a similar problem with one of those early "soft roader" SUV things, can't remember the manufacturer now.

M.

[MrReynolds2U]

Re: Good

The Vauxhall Frontera was notorious for being top heavy and there was opinion that some of the LandRover family had the same tendencies but I found them quite planted.

[Toni the terrible]

Re: Good

ESP = Extra Sensory Perception - when did they fit that in cars!

[Wayland]

Re: Good

I've always had ESP in cars. If you don't then you could slam your mini into a tractor hauling grain on a C road during harvest season.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: Good

I've always had ESP in cars. If you don't then you could slam your mini into a tractor hauling grain on a C road during harvest season

Try going round a corner on an unclissified road on a motorbike and realising that you are quickly approaching the business end of a balling machine attached to the back of a (stationary) tractor..

Lots of pointy wire bits pointing at your squishy bits.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

Or try going round the corner at a speed such that you can stop in the distance you can see to be clear...

[Not Yb]

Re: Good

That's what the radars are for.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: Good

My 1998 Mini Cooper S does not have them

Ditto for the 1966 Morris Minor.

Of course, at the moment, it only has 3 working wheels as the nearside front trunnion has decided to take a little break..

[martinusher]

Re: Good

Wrong!

Back in the day we had a well meaning 55mph speed limit in the US. It was enforced because the the enforcers were policed (you'd have average speed detectors on the Interstates -- allowing traffic to exceed the speed limit cost counties and the state Federal highway funds). As an experiment try driving at 55mph on a road that's designed for rather higher speeds, say on a 12 mile long downhill stretch of I-15. You end up riding the brakes a lot..

Roads have natural speed limits, speeds at which drivers tend to travel at. Designing the road to the speed limit rather than arbitrarily imposing some number because it sounds safer works a whole lot better and allows enforcement to focus on the dangerous outliers. It also allows speed to be aligned with road conditions -- a speed that's perfectly safe on a dry, clear, day just won't work in ice, rain or fog. Speed limits need to reflect real world conditions.

[Alfie Noakes]

Re: Good

Ah, the good old 85th-percentile :)

We used to do this in the UK as well (when road planners actually had brains, and roads were a pleasure to drive on)!

[John Robson]

Re: Good

Roads are designed for a speed, but they are also often limited later because other factors change.

It's not hard to stick to a specific speed, particularly not if you have a speed limiter available.

[LybsterRoy]

Re: Good

-- because other factors change. --

In Wales and Scotland the "other factor" is stupidity and misinterpreting facts/statistics

[John Robson]

Re: Good

So you'd *rather* get hit by a car at 30 than 20mph?

Come on - what statistic is being misrepresented. Maybe it's just that you're too much of a selfish git to care about the safety of those not encased in a tonne+ of metal armour.

[MJI]

Re: Good

I would settle by not being hit, so llok when you cross the road

[John Robson]

Re: Good

And so you're going to not get hit because someone else looks when they cross the road?

When a driver jumps a red light, or ignores a zebra crossing, or doesn't spot a child ...

No, there is a very good reason for speed limits to be lower in towns and villages.

[martinusher]

Re: Good

A really big problem in the US is the preponderance of light trucks and SUVs (legally the same thing here). Unlike cars that have to be designed to absorb energy from a pedestrian impact (and lift the person up over the vehicle) their slab fronts and tall stance not only whacks the unfortunate person full on but pushes them underneath the vehicle, thereby maximizing their injuries.

Remember that "back in the day" in the UK all Mechanically Propelled Vehicles needed to be preceded by a person walking in front carrying a red flag. This certainly made the roads safer for pedestrians but it proved impractical.

[jake]

Re: Good

So don't step out into traffic without looking. Simples. We learned it as kiddies. Remember the teachings of The Green Cross Man?

Way over here in California "Stop, Look and Listen" has been taught from the 1950s ...

_{Why would you want to get hit by a car in the first place? Glutton for punishment? It's not like one HAS to step in front of a moving vehicle, you know ...}

[John Robson]

Re: Good

And in civilised countries the people bringing the danger to a situation have a duty of care to those they are endangering.

Whilst avoiding stepping into the path of anyone is always a reasonable plan, we also don't drive across the road.

The number of motorists who don't stop at red lights, zebra crossings, roundabouts, junctions etc. mean that we need to actually limit their maximum speed.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: Good

The number of motorists who don't stop at red lights, zebra crossings, roundabouts, junctions etc. mean that we need to actually limit their maximum speed.

How does limiting their speed make them stop at red lights?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good

It doesn't, but it limits the damage that they inflict.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good

But only if the system recognises the correct limit. Failing to spot a 20 zone and allowing the previous 50 limit to apply, for example, isn't going to help.

I believe research has shown that increased driver aids have resulted in decreased driver attentiveness, primarily because you don't have to concentrate as much as you did.

[Toni the terrible]

Re: Good

Or cruise control

[John Robson]

Re: Good

Yep - CC works pretty well, but it does actually take you out of the loop of speed control, making slowing down (as opposed to emergency braking) more complex than just lifting slightly.

[Montreal Sean]

Re: Good

It's not hard to stick to the posted limit without the use of a speed limiter or cruise control.

My 2017 car comes with a speedometer, same as all the cars I've ever driven, and it tells me how fast I'm going.

I have a brake pedal to slow me down if I'm going too fast, and an accelerator pedal to increase my speed.

I find that by occasionally looking at the speedometer, and using those pedals, I am able to keep my speed within the posted limits.

If you aren't able to drive without all the "assistive" technology, it might be a better idea to take a refresher course on driving instead of adding more "assistive" tech.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good

Or alternatively it might be advisable to "raise your own skill level without f*cking the rest of us over with your nannying tech" would be how I would have phrased it.

[A.P. Veening]

Re: Good

As an experiment try driving at 55mph on a road that's designed for rather higher speeds, say on a 12 mile long downhill stretch of I-15. You end up riding the brakes a lot..

That is only a problem with automatics, with a manual gear box you just downshift and reduce gas.

[LybsterRoy]

Re: Good

Its more of a problem with automatics but it is a problem with manual gear boxes as well

[Binraider]

Re: Good

I would argue it’s more a problem with shit drivers that HAVE to be on the gas if not braking, and maybe, shit cars, if you find that a car can’t sit at a literal design speed without the brakes.

The auto I have, bung the cruise control on at 55 and you most assuredly won’t be riding the brakes for speed control. And the right foot is quite capable of doing the same. Below 10 mph is the only time brake riding becomes necessary because, automatic.

In the `UK where manuals are king, decent teachers will also make a point of teaching engine braking for same reasons.

US speed limits IMO reflect the standard of driver education by and large. Enormous, wide open multi lane highways with a 55 slapped on. Occasionally some sense on interstates to be found with 75 or 85; though relatively rare. Truly Horrendous road design too in many cases. Driving in Southern California I have a special hatred for; that makes the M25 carpark next to Heathrow look well thought out. Worst one I can think of was a left side merge onto a 4 lane highway; where many users including myself have about 500 yards to get to the right side exit from the merge.

The German autobahn and its derestricted nature is also quite the experience. Fastest I’ve drove outside of a closed circuit. ran out of cohones at about 121mph. As briefly fun the novelty is; the reality on a long run is I’ll dial in the recommended 130kph on the cruise control and largely aim for that.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good

Mmm, funny thing engine braking - I'm of an age where I learned to do it and I have used it heavily in the past.

Latest motor - Ford with one of those dinky 999cc engines and a turbo - not so good. The engine's not big enough to hold back the car so the first time I (memorably) tried it on a steep downhill I thought the pistons were going to leave the chat via the bonnet.

[Montreal Sean]

Re: Good

I'm glad you mentioned the problem with engine braking and modern smaller engines cars.

I compression (engine) brake frequently with my 6 speed 2017 Forte so I'm well acquainted with its uses.

Unfortunately, like you said, the engine is too small to hold back the car when going down slightly steeper grades and the engine ends up spinning quite high.

[IamAProton]

Re: Good

Just to point out that the engine braking that happens on gasoline cars (and motorbikes) is actually "suction braking".

Compressed air in the cylinders (small amount with throttle close anyways) act as a spring.

Compression braking is sometimes available on big diesel engines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compression_release_engine_brake).

[John PM Chappell]

Re: Good

I lost my nerve at around 160 MPH, and settled back to a steady 80 to 90 or so (which would be about the same as your choice). It was fun being able to open up, and it was fun flying along ... but I was conscious of the required braking distance and the fact that a misjudgement could turn me (briefly) into a light aircraft.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

And with a better drive train still you just fill up the battery.

Really, really, easy.

[herman]

Re: Good

Half decent modern automatics will also down shift

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Good

"a speed that's perfectly safe on a dry, clear, day just won't work in ice, rain or fog. Speed limits need to reflect real world conditions."

Shhhh....coming soon to a car near you. Weather dependant automatic speed limiters!

[Ythermos]

Re: Good

That would be really good, for some reason in the UK if there's even a drizzle somebody will crash on the A34, while it very rarely happens on sunny days...

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Good

That would be really good, for some reason in the UK if there's even a drizzle somebody will crash on the A34, while it very rarely happens on sunny days...

Used to happen fairly often on the A329(M) just outside Wokingham. Fairly deep puddles would form on the outside lane and give drivers a chance to find out what aquaplaning or puddle-assisted driver-assist felt like. I think I was fortunate when I did my driving lessons that the fire service ran skid pan sessions. It was great to actually experience bad conditions rather than just read about them. Plus my instructor was an ex-police instructor who told me to read both the Highway Code and their Defensive Driving manual and taught me to drive rather than just pass the test. Both he and the fire service had attended enough fatalities and wanted us to avoid becoming one.

But I guess it'd be simple enough to link car's automatic wipers to throttle control.

[Steve Davies 3]

Re: Shhhhh....

And then... the cars that report themselves when a driver is speeding. They'd upload the speed profile and dashcam footage.

The first that you know about it is when you get the speeding ticket summons through the post.

[see icon]

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Shhhhh....

"The first that you know about it is when you get the speeding ticket summons through the post."

I think that would be the second notification. The first would be the notification from your insurgence company increasing the premium :-)

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Shhhhh....

"your insurgence company"

Bloody autoi-correct! Although that was a funny one :-)

[El Biggles]

Re: Good

My car already has that feature, but it only works in countries which have differential speed limits, such as France. It also detects when towing and applies the appropriate speed limit. ISA isn't switched on by default though.

[Toni the terrible]

Re: Good

M25 variable speed limits anyone

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Good

*Other motorways with variable speed limits are available throughout the UK, not just the M25 :-)

[Dizzy Dwarf]

Re: Good

The M25: where getting into 2nd gear feels like you're winning.

[LybsterRoy]

Re: Good

-- As an experiment try driving at 55mph on a road that's designed for rather higher speeds --

Up here in Scotland the experiment is driving at 20mph

[lybad]

Re: Good

Guess that depends - most of my local town centre is 20mph. People tend to observe that through the actual high street, but not the road that goes past a primary school and suddenly narrows, and worse than that, last night while I was walking past, three cars in a row ignored the mini roundabout and went effectively the wrong way round it. Unfortunately one of them did that while a car was already on the roundabout...

My thing about speed limiters is that we have one car, which allows you to set the speed limit and see the setting on the dashboard. The cruise control doesn't display the speed it's set to, which is crazy.

However, we also have a motability vehicle, which displays the speed limit on the dashboard and on the satnav - and that is camera based. If you go over the speed limit, it flashes at you for a few seconds, then sits there looking angrily at you. However, it's not unusual for it to misread or completely ignore the road signs. Last week I drove down from Aberdeen, and as soon as we hit the national speed limit on the dual carriageway, and it insisted it was a 30mph road all the way until Laurencekirk, when it went to 50mph (correctly), and then went back to 30mph, until I got home. So about 50 miles of reading the speed wrongly.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good

"Last week I drove down from Aberdeen..."

I know that road rather well. I recently read a report that the average speed cameras on the Stonehaven to Dundee stretch have one of the highest fines:cars ratio in Scotland (the highest being the 50mph stretch at Laurencekirk.

My car has a satnav that displays the speed and will warn when I exceed it (but my car is approaching 7 years old and the cost to update the maps, to keep up with changes, is ridiculous) - not 100% but a useful guide. My car also reads road signs and warns me if I exceed the limit by 5mph - very useful, but annoying when side roads have limit signs as it reads those and uses that. The systems are useful and I like them but the current state of technology is only fit as a guide and could be dangerous if used to actually impact on the car controls. For example, I could be driving in traffic at a steady 70mph past Portlethen and the car sees a 30mph sign at a turn off and immediately apply the brakes. It's all very well saying everyone should drive within their stopping distance but sudden braking on an otherwise clear road will inevitably lead to accidents; drivers are human and not perfect.

[veti]

Re: Good

That's all well and good, but conditions change, and so do cars. When I was learning to drive in rural England, the speed limit on an open country road was 60 mph, and I'd often drive to it. For clarity, these were not good roads - just a strip of asphalt, barely wide enough for two cars to pass, with no markings, no sidewalks, no lights, and as often as not, ditches on either side.

I wouldn't drive at those speeds today, though. I'm older, less cocky, and the cars are a good bit wider. I suspect there's a whole ritual to allow two fat modern cars to pass, more than the old "hug your side, foot hard down and smile".

[Ythermos]

Re: Good

Stupidest take ever, the 55mph was for fuel savings, and indeed check your fuel usage, you're likely for find the car significantly more efficient at 55 than 70 mph.

The natural speed limit on a straight road is the maximum speed I can accelerate to, if you're advocating to remove speed limits on motorways then I can get behind that, but removing the 50mph from a country stretch just because it's straight and you'll end up with a lot of deaths on the first turn at the end

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Good

Stupidest take ever, the 55mph was for fuel savings, and indeed check your fuel usage, you're likely for find the car significantly more efficient at 55 than 70 mph.

Depends on the car and gearing I guess. But also one of the issues with 20mph zones. It just ain't natural and many cars aren't really geared for that speed. But also a driving thing, ie paying attention to the revs as well as the speedo. At 20mph the car might be revving higher than it would at 30mph and is less efficient. Perhaps in future, automakers will fit crawler gears to cars, and not just lorries. One of the things I dislike about modern cars is the way they sacrifice drivers. Comfort rather than being able to feel what the car is doing.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

The throttle pedal works both ways - and I've not had an issue driving at 20 in manual petrol or diesel cars, nor in automatic petrol or diesel cars... And certainly not an in EV.

[Andy A]

Re: Good

My car's engine is idling in 3rd gear at 20 mph. That means I'm using twice the fuel (and hence producing twice as much pollution) as when idling in 6th gear at 40 mph. Most commercial vehicles will produce similar effects.

Just slapping a limit on because of "policy" rather than looking at the actual road conditions, seems rather stupid.

[MJI]

Re: Good

I use first in 20s as it is below the speed in D the car will do on just off no throttle (mid 20s)

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good

exactly this. One of my commute routes from SE Cornwall in to Plymouth is via the A38 which involves a tunnel a bridge and a mix of 2 lanes, 3 lane and dual carriage way. The bridge is a 30mph as is the tunnel, the main section of the A38 is utter dog shit and has a 50 limit, it hasn't improved over the years and has a high accident rate. The one bit that has been improved is a section from a roundabout to the tunnel about a mile, it is pretty much straight its dual carriageway has no junctions and is downhill and has hardly had any accidents in the past 20 years and has a 70 limit. So in the past few months the powers at be, National highways, have been "improving" the tunnel by installing average speed cameras, despite the facts there's hardly any accidents in it ever. But worse than that the dual carriageway section has now been made a 50, the result you spend most of your time on the breaks trying to keep to 50 going down the hill.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

And your letter to the relevant authority has had what response?

[A.P. Veening]

Re: Good

the result you spend most of your time on the breaks trying to keep to 50 going down the hill.

As my elder son would say: "Skill issue!"

[Annihilator]

Re: Good

"As an experiment try driving at 55mph on a road that's designed for rather higher speeds, say on a 12 mile long downhill stretch of I-15. You end up riding the brakes a lot.. Roads have natural speed limits, speeds at which drivers tend to travel at."

What utter tripe. Roads do not have "natural" speed limits - how on earth would such a thing exist? It's perfectly feasible to drive at any speed (below the idling speed in 1st is tricky I'll grant you), if you can't, then you don't know how to control the car.

Your experiment is around people's habits, nothing more - so yes, travelling at 55 on a road you normally do 70 on, you may find tricky or find yourself drifting back to where you're accustomed. But a very real example of your experiment is driving with a spare/spacer tyre which has a speed limit of 50mph on a 70 road. Done this plenty of times, and no, I didn't find myself riding the brakes. Similarly through average speed checks on a motorway during roadworks in the UK - the speed limit changes to 50 from 70. People don't need to ride the brakes to achieve this.

Now there are some "natural" speeds of cars - the idling speed in each gear (manual or automatic) will give a fixed pull when you're not touching the throttle. But all of that is entirely variable in the real world, dependent on head/tailwind conditions, resistance of the road, tyre pressures and road gradients.

[imanidiot]

Re: Good

Roads DO have "natural speeds" (Not a speed limit, just a speed that most drivers will naturally end up driving). Design features like lane width, size of signs and their heights above the road, even the size and position of the guardrail make a notable difference in the perception of speed of drivers and thus their "natural" speed they are inclined to drive a on a given road. These are most relevant in more urban environments where narrowing lanes slightly or building them with a gentle swaying curve instead of dead straight can noticeably reduce the average speed.

[Annihilator]

Re: Good

The roads don't - the drivers do. How else do you explain the variation in speeds on a british motorway? Sure, road conditions will change things, but risk aversion varies by person.

I'm more reacting to the OP who thinks that a driver will have to be constantly braking to meet an "unnatural" speed, which is just nonsense. Or indicative of a poor driver. As evidenced by the two examples I've given where huge stretches of the M4 can be slowed to 50mph limits with average speed checks even without the roadworks being set up yet, or driving with a spacer wheel. In neither example do I find myself accidentally speeding up to an imaginary "natural" speed of the road.

[imanidiot]

Re: Good

Just because YOU never find yourself speeding in an inattentive moment doesn't mean the same doesn't work for other drivers. Whether it's the road that has a natural speed or the drivers that drive on it is semantics. Road design can help in making less attentive or less risk averse drivers aware of their speed and get them to naturally slow down, without affecting attentive or cautious drivers at all (they probably wouldn't even notice.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

"Just because YOU never find yourself speeding in an inattentive moment doesn't mean the same doesn't work for other drivers. "

And that skill issue is the whole reason behind the policy.

It's not actually hard to not speed, and this is a tool that helps those who can't even meet that bar.

[A.P. Veening]

Re: Good

(below the idling speed in 1st is tricky I'll grant you)

No problem in a manual, just needs correct usage of the clutch.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good...I can't drive 55...

Not sure where you were driving on the interstate pre 1995 but out on the west coast the only time you saw traffic doing 55 was when there was a police cruiser on the prowl. Or you were in the city / county limits of a jurisdiction that used speeding tickets as a big revenue source. Like King City on 101. Otherwise it was 70+. Usually much higher.

The main effect of upping the limit on California interstates to 65 in 1995 was speeds actually dropped on most metro area interstates as people now pretty much stuck to 65/70. Very few driving faster. I know in the Bay Area driving freeways like 280 became a lot more relaxing after 1995 as there were far fewer driving way over the limit.

There was a whole lot of Federal Funding mandates over the 55 limit back then. But the empty states out west just worked around them. Like Montana had a flat rate speeding ticket of $20 as long as the freeway was empty and you were not driving dangerously. i.e you were driving a muscle car at high speed not a Ford Pinto. Knew someone who was doing a cross country in the early 1990's in a really nice up powered Mustang who got pulled over doing 120mph+ in Montana. The Highway Patrol guys were mainly interested in looking over the car. Popping the hood etc. Talking muscle cars. They were very apologetic when they wrote the ticket. Mainly because the car had out of state plates so they had to. But told the guy if he got pulled over again before reaching stateline just show the ticket and he should be good to go.

As for speed limit limiters. Bloody stupid. On more than one occasion I was only saved from a traffic accident by flooring it. Using speed to get out of trouble. Saying that I drove cars with speed limiters for many years. 7 series BMW's with the Autobahn speed limiter. 155mph. Which sounds pretty reasonable to me.

[Martin an gof]

Re: Good

So this system will have exactly no effect on you whatsoever - in fact it will help

As was mentioned in the article and as I am sure some of the 200+ comments I haven't yet read will point out, as things stand - and I admit I have limited experience - the opposite is likely to be the case.

My wife's car is fitted with a speed limit recognition system. GPS combined with sign recognition. Fortunately it only flashes a warning on the dash and isn't permanently connected to a limiter.

• the map had incorrect speed limit data from day one, for example it thinks the road through our village is 60mph when it has been 30mph (now 20mph) as long as I can remember
• the map is out of date and won't get an update because Citroën want far too much money for it. Very out of date in Wales, with our recently-introduced expanded 20mph zones
• the camera fails to detect temporary speed limits properly, particularly motorway gantries. It might read the limit and miss the next one, and after a while it reverts to the "expected" road speed
• the camera often spots speed limit signs on adjacent roads, or roads leading off, meaning it flashes a warning that is not relevant. I'm sure you can imagine what having an automatic limiter cut in at 20mph on a 40mph road would do to the eejit behind you who is already fuming because you are daring to stick to the posted 40mph limit

I could go on.

On a possibly related note - have you noticed the little rectangular or trapezoidal "box" which has started appearing on newer cars and vans, usually under the number plate on the grille? Typically cars under 3 years old? Any idea what it's for?

M.

P.S., off topic; while I am not a fan of the blanket imposition of the new 20mph limits in Wales, most (not all) of them are actually perfectly sensible and 20mph by default makes a lot of sense in built-up areas. The people who are really up in arms about it are the types who didn't like doing 30mph anyway and completely ignored existing 20mph limits which were generally just outside schools. The number of times I've been passed dangerously since the 20mph limits came in is scary. A few weeks ago, some twit started to overtake me on the zig-zags leading to a pedestrian crossing that I had already seen was about to change. I had to lean on the horn to warn the pedestrian who was just starting to cross, and said twit came to a halt only just in time. And when the lights went green? He sped off at a speed that was not only over 20mph, but looked to me to be well over 30mph.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Good

On a possibly related note - have you noticed the little rectangular or trapezoidal "box" which has started appearing on newer cars and vans, usually under the number plate on the grille? Typically cars under 3 years old? Any idea what it's for?

I think that's for the radar/lidar sensors and possibly camera for managing all the 'driver assist' gubbins.

[Dave K]

Re: Good

Exactly what I came here to say. I've lost count of the times my Merc CLA has:

* Randomly claimed a single-carriageway road is a 70 limit

* Randomly claimed a dual-carriageway is a 60 limit

* Spotted a sign for a slip-road and insisted the speed limit on the dual-carriageway has dropped to 40mph

* Spotted the first of those "30mph in 300 yards" sign and insisted I'm in a 30 limit right now

* Wrongly claimed that completed roadworks are still present, so I must be in a 40 limit on the motorway (the old mapping data curse)

Thankfully, you can turn the warning beeps and flashing of the "perceived" speed limit off so that it just displays it in a static manner without nagging. However if it tried to actively impose those limits on my driving, it would be frankly dangerous.

It's the same mess with that hateful feature of lane-assist. Again, sounds good until you realise it:

* Can't cope with contraflows

* Often gets confused when white-lines have been re-drawn

* Attempts to override you swerving an obstruction such as a pothole and attempts to steer you into said obstruction

* Gets confused when low sunlight reflects off shiny tar repairs (attempting to suddenly swerve you into oncoming traffic).

Again, it's a feature that I consider more "dangerous" than "safety". I'm less lucky in that this system turns itself back on every time I start the car, but it has become muscle memory to go into settings and disable it each time.

This ultimately is the biggest problem with these so-called safety features. They sound fine on paper, but there are simply too many times when they don't work properly and attempt to override your vehicle control in a dangerous manner.

[Terry2000]

Re: Good

ESP is for people that cannot steer.

ABS is for people that can’t stop.

In the US both systems are disabled on police cars because they interfere with the driver’s ability to make the vehicle respond to control inputs.

Although the technology has improved I had a Mustang several years ago that every time you pulled out into traffic the differential speed of the inside and outside wheels caused the computer to cut the throttle to idle. It became habit to get in the car, start the engine, and turn off ESP.

ESP MAY keep you from entering a skid. But it will hinder recovery if you do.

ABS is less offensive but still no substitute for a skilled driver. In most cases it will do at least as good as a human in preventing hydroplaning. But on dry pavement the very shortest stopping distance is achieved by the friction of your tires erasing themselves against the pavement.

All these systems are just crutches to enable less qualified people to drive. If the real goal is to reduce accidents a better plan would be testing that you will fail until you learn to properly operate a vehicle.

[imanidiot]

Re: Good

The vast, VAST majority of drivers aren't skilled or trained enough to get the maximum braking force out of a car without ABS. The vast majority of drivers aren't skilled or capable enough to handle a starting skid without ESP and would be doomed without it as they wouldn't be able to recover it anyway.

The reality is that "less qualified" people ARE driving. They are driving all the time, they will be driving all the time, even without these assistance systems. For a tiny minority of people (like trained police officers who regularly have to re-qualify their driving skills) they MIGHT be a tiny hindrance but turns out, with training on how to work with these systems that downside is basically non-existent and training usually focuses on not having to drive so on the limit that these systems are needed in the first place.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: Good

The vast, VAST majority of drivers aren't skilled or trained enough to get the maximum braking force out of a car without ABS. The vast majority of drivers aren't skilled or capable enough to handle a starting skid without ESP and would be doomed without it as they wouldn't be able to recover it anyway.

ABS makes no difference to braking force, it is intended to prevent wheel lockup and so maintain steering control even under emergency braking. It's only used in emergency situations, and although an experienced driver may not need it, and may never trigger it, it doesn't hurt to have it there as a backstop.

Likewise for EPC/TCS systems. They handle the situation where a car is at the limits of control, so an experienced driver should never get into a situation on a public road where it comes into action, but if it helps a novice who overdoes it on a curve so much the better. EPS does have one downside, it's not useful on snowy hills where it tends to drop engine revs to the point where the car stalls, but that isn't an emergency situation & there's plenty of time to push the "Off" button in those rare cases (except in modern cars where that option is 5 clicks down in a touch screen menu system :-( ).

Both are a far cry from things like lane assist or automatic braking, which intervene all the time and can be actively dangerous. In my personal experience lane assist is very dangerous on narrow country roads where it can misinterpret road makings as lanes, and tries to nudge the car away from the verge directly into the path of oncoming HGVs or coaches. Similarly I've had the emergency braking system slam on the brakes, with a blaring siren, just because I eased off on the brake as I approached a line of stationary traffic at a red light, or when the road curved and it mistook a car parked safely to the side as being stopped in my lane. I was still in full control, but the siren startled both me and my passengers and had I not recognised what it was it could have caused an accident. It certainly startled the car behind when my car braked hard and totally unnecessarily.

[Wayland]

Re: Get a horse

Now that ABS and ESP are mature technologies they work unobtrusively. However in my Supra MKIII the ABS was worse than useless so I did pull out the fuse. The car's limited slip diff made ESP unnecessary.

Cars already have a system to prevent accidental speeding, cruise control. Drive up to the speed limit then switch it on and the car stays at that speed until you touch the brakes or accelerator.

If cruise control were to have a button that sets speed to the speed limit then that maybe a welcome enhancement.

A nagging bleeping system that wrestles with your right foot for control is not how I want my machine to function. If I wanted to have a battle of wills with my ride I'd get a horse.

[mantavani]

Re: Good

I remain to be convinced, because the signposted limit is not necessary the safe limit, and people who were 'just doing the limit' quite often get themselves and/or others killed. I suspect that people of the OP's mindset are the kind of people that I frequently follow doing 40 in a 60, and continue doing 40 through the 30, and yep, still doing 40 out the other side.

In any case, my current VW - which has the detection kit if not the annoying beeping - is not apparently capable of recognising the 4 miles of national speed limit on the way in to town, thus pissing off everyone following if I try to use the 'smart' cruise (its useful on motorways, but surely no-one is ignorant of the limit there). Meanwhile, the lane assist frequently tries to get me to turn in to parked cars or other obstacles that I'm passing courteously. It's the opposite of helpful. I've yet to have it properly correct my road position, yet if you turn it off, it's back on again the next time you start the car.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

"people who were 'just doing the limit' quite often get themselves and/or others killed."

By what mechanism? Is it by impatient drivers breaking the law and killing them?

That's like blaming american school children for getting themselves killed by a shooter.

[Mrs Spartacus]

I Bet you're great fun at parties

Just saying...

[Michael Wojcik]

Re: I Bet you're great fun at parties

Certainly it would be a huge mistake for anyone to mention automobiles in the presence of Mr Robson, who has turned obnoxious axe-grinding on the subject into an art form.

[LybsterRoy]

Re: Good

Usually its because those drivers are the ones who "follow the rules" even when the rules do not make sense (have you read the latest edition of the highway code?) and cause frustration and "road rage" They are also the ones who pull out of a side road just in front of you and then accelerate veeery slowly to the speed limit, who will stay behind a pedal bike because there isn't enough space to overtake in accordance with the rules (even though there is plenty of room)

-- That's like blaming american school children for getting themselves killed by a shooter --

Please cease being bloody stupid.

[Ythermos]

Re: Good

After the first comment I was more with you but after this one it's clear you'll be the one slamming into someone because they're doing the speed limit causing you road rage, or overtaking cyclists dangerously.

Maybe you're that driver who was reversing their pick up truck on a country lane in a turn in the wrong lane the other day.. I'm sure that "made sense" to them

Seriously you deserve the speed limiter to be enforced on you at all times.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

So it's actually people who don't want to obey the rules of the road who are dangerous, not the person who does obey them - thanks for clearing that up.

" stay behind a pedal bike because there isn't enough space to overtake in accordance with the rules (even though there is plenty of room)"

If you think that then you've never actually ridden a bike on the road - frankly if you're taking *any* of the oncoming traffic lane (hint, that's 99,99% of roads) then you can take all of it and give the cyclist a full lane.

"have you read the latest edition of the highway code?"

Which bit do you have an issue with? I think I can guess, but tell me.

"Please cease being bloody stupid."

Yes, please do - particularly when you're in control of a lethal machine in a public place.

[Richtea]

Re: Good

> "people who were 'just doing the limit' quite often get themselves and/or others killed."

> By what mechanism? Is it by impatient drivers breaking the law and killing them?

Inattention. Drivers look but don't see. Especially if they're bored. SMIDSY - "Sorry Mate I Didn't See You"

Driver education would solve this, i.e further teaching on how to recognise and react to hazards.

Long term, advanced driving courses would help. Short term it would take too long to implement across the country, it's too expensive (the gov will not factor in that its good for life), and drivers would be up in arms because, as we know, everyone drives better than average.

[MachDiamond]

Re: Good

"because the signposted limit is not necessary the safe limit, and people who were 'just doing the limit' quite often get themselves and/or others killed."

In the US, there is an overriding concept called the "Basic Speed Law" which is you are not allowed to drive any faster than it is safe. In dense fog, that could be zero. When the roads are icy, it doesn't matter what the posted "limit" is, one can still be cited for speed while still going slower than the signs indicate. It's not common to get a citation for speeding under the posted limit, but it happens frequently enough and people that get those tickets are often going much faster than everybody else around them who have slowed down to match the conditions.

[jake]

Re: Good

Likewise in some (most? (all??)) US jurisdictions, it is illegal to impede the flow of traffic.

In other words, if you are tooling along at the speed limit and all the other cars are backing up behind you, you are required by law to pull over (where safe) and let the faster traffic pass. Even if they are breaking the posted speed limit.

In fact, you can get a moving violation for this, EVEN IF you are doing the legal speed limit. It is not up to you to ensure that the rest of the traffic is obeying the law. You are not a cop, and shouldn't assume you are allowed to make that decision for everybody else.

As my Grandfather put it, "Drive your own drive, and allow others to drive theirs".

[Mark Exclamation]

Re: Good

EXACTLY this ^^^^^^^^

[Twilight]

Re: Good

And studies have shown that people going too slowly (impeding traffic) are MORE dangerous than those speeding.

[imanidiot]

Re: Good

It's not speed that kills, it's a difference in speed where people aren't expecting one. And that is what makes people driving slower than the majority of traffic so dangerous.

[LybsterRoy]

Re: Good

Brilliant - have an unlawful 100 upvotes

[Ythermos]

Re: Good

Sounds like traffic police propaganda, not going to lie. So if I speed it's actually everyone else breaking the law because they're on my way? Sounds awesome!

[imanidiot]

Re: Good

If you're the only one speeding, no. If you're one of only a few sticking to a speed limit, yes. This isn't a black and white issue and will be very situation dependant

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Good

Likewise in some (most? (all??)) US jurisdictions, it is illegal to impede the flow of traffic.

I think it's the same in the UK where driving too slowly can get a ticket for driving without due care and attention. Driving too slowly can be just as dangerous as driving too fast as it impedes traffic. It was also a reason to fail driving tests, from memory 'failure to make progress' to reinforce the point.

[Caspian Prince]

Re: Good

There are *very* few circumstances in the UK where this would apply though, and in any case, there are *no* circumstances in which it is permissible to exceed the posted speed limit.

[MachDiamond]

Re: Good

"There are *very* few circumstances in the UK where this would apply though, and in any case, there are *no* circumstances in which it is permissible to exceed the posted speed limit."

I agree. There are videos online where a person protests that everybody else was going the too fast speed and ask why it's them that's getting the citation. The cop tells them it must be luck. (just because it's bad doesn't mean that it isn't luck)

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good... not quite how it works in California

If you are driving at below the speed limit for whatever reason and its a single lane road then you are required to pull over and let other vehicles pass when there are 5 or more behind you. Above the speed limit no such obligation as a bunch of other CVC's kick in. But for ag vehicles, big rig trucks climbing steep grades etc the rule is not enforced for obvious reasons. If you get caught behind a big rig in the mountains everyone knows the drill. Slow and careful and give the truck room until the first pull out. In my experience these are mostly lumber haulers. So its under 20mph for a few miles and enjoy the view.

They have some other great rules in California. If its daylight and the brake lights of the vehicles in front start "glowing" then ambient light is low so time to put on your headlights. Same goes for windshield wipers. Wipers on, headlights on. They still haven't got the hang of turn signals on roundabouts. Or when changing lanes. I follow European rules. And I like the 30 second rule for freeways. Move over to next lane on right unless you will have to move back again within 30 seconds. Not sure which country has this rule but it makes for much safer driving.

[LybsterRoy]

Re: Good

-- it's back on again the next time you start the car --

This is one of the most annoying things. I had a VW Passat with the auto brake hold feature but I had to press the button every time I got into the car, I also had to press a button every time I locked the car whilst our dog was in to disable the internal alarm. My current car is a Skoda Octavia and I have to select Eco mode every time.

[imanidiot]

Re: Good

You have EU regulations to thank for that. It's mandatory for such "safety" nanny features to be enabled every time the car is turned on with a provision the user is allowed to disable them should they so choose at that time (until the car is turned off and turned back on). The idea is that this would mean that a car shared between people can't unexpectedly have safety features that one driver relies on being there get disabled without their knowing by a different driver.

[JimboSmith]

Re: Good

If you need a machine to do that, then get a taxi. You are a danger to road users if you require assistance like that to control the vehicle.

I was in a taxi recently heading towards Knightsbridge on my way to the West End late one night. One of those foreign fast cars that seem endemic in the summer with boy racer and trophy girlfriend inside pulled up at the lights next to us. He’s revving the engine like a madman I assume to show off, and it’s making a terrible noise. I said to the cab driver that it wasn’t big or clever to do that and he laughed. “I’ve got got decades more behind the wheel than him,, this is also an electric taxi so I’ve far better acceleration than him from the lights and a bus lane to use, he’s toast. And he was

[LybsterRoy]

Re: Good

Can I have his reg no - I want to avoid that taxi! (especially as a passenger)

[Ythermos]

Re: Good

The reg is THT HPND because it's probably a made up story

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Good

He’s revving the engine like a madman I assume to show off, and it’s making a terrible noise.

Shakespeare wrote about those kinds of drivers: Much sound and fury, signifying nothing.

[Ythermos]

Re: Good

Your whining about a system that, as you indicated, will mever affect your perfect driving to me shows two things: the system is good, ans that you're likely over exaggerating your 'perfect driving'.

I find the speed limiter excellent for 20 or 30 mph limits - it is far too easy to accidentally go over it, and claiming you're always on perfect knowledge of your speed is laughable.

In fact it should be taken a step further - the L/B mode on automatic which starts breaking as soon as you let go of the gas should be automatically enabled under 50mph. I reckon that'll save a good bunch of lives.

[NightFox]

Re: Good

There are three types of driver:

- Those who make mistakes and learn from them

- Those who make mistakes but deny them

- Those who make mistakes but aren't even aware of them

I'd question the honesty and/or awareness of anyone who claims that their driving's so good that there's no benefit to be gained from safety systems. And the arrogance of those who resort to cheap and personal attacks saying that anyone who simply makes use of them shouldn't be driving.

[The man with a spanner]

Re: Good

With speed limits bouncing around with no consistancy, and the prevalence of dynamic speed limits arbitarily applied it is all too easy to miss the sign telling you of the change.

When you build a system, if you want compliance, you should make it easy to comply with and as predictable as posible.

If you are going to introduce randomising factors such as dynamic speed limits you need technology to cope with human frailty.

[JimBz]

Re: Good

That's good and reasonable, but people are mentally different and have different capabilities. A government would be voted out if it only licenced drivers who meet your level. A bit of a capability augmentation is ok. How do you feel about ABS? Lane keeping and vehicle distance monitoring? Ideally, we all be ideal drivers, reality is messy.

[Rich 2]

Re: Good

So you’re saying that you habitually drive along taking no interest in how fast you’re going? Just relying on an automated system to keep your car in check?

Fuck!! I hope I’m never on the same road as you

[John Robson]

Re: Good

No, I'm saying that having a second set of eyes looking at that one aspect of driving is useful.

[jospanner]

Re: Good

paying attention to how fast you’re going *is* safe driving, not least because the speed limit is not the same thing as the current safe speed, depending on road condition, traffic, visibility, and weather.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

"paying attention to how fast you’re going *is* safe driving"

No - it's a *part* of safe driving.

[Rich 2]

Re: Good

Re: “No, I’m saying….”

That’s not the same as denying that you habitually drive along taking no interest in how fast you’re going :-)

Where did I put that popcorn?

[John Robson]

Re: Good

And you didn't say that you weren't a serial rapist... SO...

I never drive without paying attention to my speed.

However there are multiple ways to do so, and I find the availability of a secondary check to be a positive addition. It's not like it kicks in frequently, but it does just put a cap on speeds without any additional effot.

Blimey - from what's been posted here all driving licenses everywhere should just be revoked.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good

I rarely have to glance at the dash, because I *know* that I am not exceeding the limit, ...

Please try to read and understand a comment before replying.

[jospanner]

Re: Good

maybe you could, idk, pay attention while driving 1.5 tonnes of steel at 70mph

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Good

maybe you could, idk, pay attention while driving 1.5 tonnes of steel at 70mph

Make that 2.5 tonnes at an indicated speed. How fast it's actually going, or whether that's safe for the road conditions, John probably has no idea. He mentioned regenerative braking, so probably drives a Tesla. To paraphase doctors, let software take its course. I think a lot of Tesla's features should be renamed Driver Assisted Suicide. Except by distracting the drivers, they also end up killing or injuring other road users.

But now this feature is mandatory, it won't be long before it's extended to include auto-ticketing and distance charging.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good

Is it because you're a habitual law breaker who doesn't care about the danger they pose to others on the road?

You come across as one of those idiots who don't care about the danger they pose to others on the road because they are unable to pay attention to the prevailing road and traffic conditions.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

No - I can pay attention quite well - but there is *never* a requirement to exceed the posted limit - which is the only time that this would ever activate.

prevailing conditions include the posted speed limit. It's an upper limit, not a minimum speed.

[jake]

Re: Good

"I can pay attention quite well"

But it sounds to me like you not only do not when behind the wheel, but you also have no interest in doing so.

Again, get off the road before you kill someone. Please.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good

"I can pay attention quite well"

The mantra of every driver who has crashed.

The overwhelming majority of drivers consider themselves to have above-average driving skills. They're wrong. And so are you. There are plenty of circumstances where breaking the speed limit is a requirement - emergencies for example. If you fail to agree or understand, you frankly shouldn't have a driving licence.

BTW when the traffic on the motorway is doing 80mph or so, it's far safer to keep up with the traffic flow than stay below the speed limit. The cops are more likely to bust someone who does that for dangerous driving or driving without due care and attention instead of going after the ones who are speeding.

[9Rune5]

Re: Good

in fact I often find that I'm going 1mph below the speed limit

Do you realize that your speedometer is showing at least 1 mph too much? So if it shows 49 mph you are driving at no more than 48 mph.

In that case: You are a very slow person and keeping up traffic behind you. Please let them pass.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

They're quite welcome to pass. But the speed limit is a limit, not a target.

My speedo is actually pretty accurate compared with GPS.

Of course there are also plenty of roads where the hazard and speed limit don't match - usually the speed limit is far too high (country roads with a 60mph limit and blind corners)

[jake]

Re: Good

"usually the speed limit is far too high"

Get off the road before you kill somebody. Please. You are not fit to drive.

[Binraider]

Re: Good

I've seen minor, and I do mean minor , windy and blind country roads in Ireland posted as 130kph. Attempting to do so would be literal suicide.

Major routes are usually reasonably well though out, but there is a lot of older and or minor routes where the limits make no sense.

60mph on Cornish country roads is similarly dumb, because of how fat cars have got. Rather than addressing the problem by widening the road, the limit gets hit instead (pro ably, after an accident).

I'm with the OP that a lot of minor roads have poorly thought out limits, and driving to conditions is necessary.

[Dizzy Dwarf]

Re: Good

Someone should invent a system of dashed and solid lines.

[Anomalous Cowturd]

Re: Good

"Someone should invent a system of dashed and solid lines."

It'll never work. ;o)

[Justthefacts]

Re: Good

“What are you doing complaining about a system that helps you not break the law?”

Because the law was originally written *by human beings* in an era where they made assumptions about how it would be enforced, and the technical constraints of the time.

For one example: speedometers are routinely set to read about 10% high, because fifty years ago that was the accuracy, and we couldn’t afford for them to be wrong by 10% in the other direction. You can *check* your speedo now against your GPS, and correct for that. And you *should*; please tell me that you’ve bothered to find out how fast your car is really going. But the car auto-setting will be going off the *deliberately* 10% high reading. So there’s that.

Or: trucks routinely drive to their speed limiter, which synchronises them and causes them to take upwards of five miles to pass each other on the motorway. This causes a lot of congestion.

Or: the original draughters of the law were perfectly aware that it is *safety-critical* to be able to accelerate away from some situations, temporarily exceeding the speed limit. They never thought that the speed limit would be a problem, because they assumed the human in charge would be sensible enough to take action appropriately, and no police officer would prosecute you for accelerating to avoid being hit by a school bus and causing thirty deaths. The draughters never *dreamed* that any moron would be stupid enough to take the safety equipment out of human hands, and put it in the hands of a device that wasn’t even looking at the road, just reading the map.

Just exactly as the originators of the Bus Lane never *dreamed* that automated cameras would prosecute people for pulling into a bus lane to allow a blue light ambulance through. But now that’s exactly what happens. And now nobody in London ever pulls over into the bus lane to allow the ambulance through, for that very reason.

[jake]

Re: Good

"a system that helps you not break the law?"

The Law is an ass.

[feral]

Re: Good

Govern me harder daddy!

[Toni the terrible]

Re: Good

If you are usually travelling at 1mph below the limit you may be driving dangerously, the limit is the max you are permitted (for safety) not a target!

[Persona]

Re: Good

I rarely have to glance at the dash, because I *know* that I am not exceeding the limit

So it's you in the middle lane of the motorway zipping along at 20 miles an hour. I think I came across you just last week. Turn off the speed limiter and get used to giving your dashboard more than a rare glance.

[werdsmith]

Re: Good

I saw there were a lot of comments on this article and looked in to see why.

The most emotionally immature discourse I have ever seen on Register comments. Both sides, nobody here covering themselves in glory.

[jake]

Re: Good

You post here to cover yourself in glory?

How's that working out for you, then?

[Persona]

Re: Good

If you are looking for glory in The Register comments you have come to the wrong place. It's not about glory, it's about having fun.

[werdsmith]

Re: Good

Oh it's quite the laugh alright.

But I doubt many of the commentators are enjoying it.

(thanks @Jake for proving my point).

[jake]

Re: Good

"But I doubt many of the commentators are enjoying it."

And yet here they, and you, continue to read and comment. Seems to me that folks are quite entertained.

"thanks @Jake for proving my point"

Asking questions about your point is not proof. It's implication that your point was poorly made, and needs clarification.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good

What are you doing driving a vehicle you can't control the speed of?

I know someone with an up until this incident had always had a perfectly clean driving licence since they started driving which is over 35 years. They drive really carefully and it can be infuriating at times if travelling with them because of this.They had a jackass driving erratically behind them with sudden bursts of speed and then slowing down weaving etc. At they were approaching a speed camera the speed of the car behind them increased suddenly. So to avoid a crash my friend was 3mph over the speed limit, for probably the first time ever.The speed camera got them and they and got a chance at joining a speed awareness course. On that course they discovered that some of the roads they used regularly had a higher speed limit than they thought. So they now travel safely at under the actual speed limit, not what they though it was.

One wonders how long it will be before there are guides on the net and garages willing to help disable these new features? Sounds lika a new industry in the making.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Good

"So to avoid a crash my friend was 3mph over the speed limit, for probably the first time ever.The speed camera got them "

Where? Pretty much the whole of the UK, speed cameras are set to trigger at speed limit + 10% +2, so even in a 30mph zone it won't trigger until you are doing 35mph or more, And, as mentioned above, most cars read higher than actual speed anyway, so in a 30 zone, you probably need to be doing 37mph+ by the cars speedo to trip a speed camera. I've not tested that, but a quick search on the t'internet gives multiple results from road safety orgs, insurance companies and the like making that claim.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: Good

Pretty much the whole of the UK, speed cameras are set to trigger at speed limit + 10% +2, so even in a 30mph zone it won't trigger until you are doing 35mph or more

Do bear in mind that part of the reason for that is that the camera hardware has tolerances, so when it clocks you at 30 you might be doing anywhere from maybe 28-32. If the camera is reading, say, 5% high then passing it at a real 35 might cause it to register 38.5, well into the "+10% +2" zone.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Good

I found it quite difficult to find any reference to speed camera accuracy. Only one site referred to "2% accurate", all the rest referring to "tolerance", where tolerance is used to define the level of tolerance to speeding, ie the speed + 10% + 2mph which most Police forces use as a prosecution threshold, the cameras being deliberately set to not trigger at the limit, but at that leeway trigger point. Also, car speedos are allowed to over read by 10% +6mph but NOT under read at all. Based on that unverified single source, you car could be showing you driving at 70+ mph while you are actually doing 60mph and the speed camera may be reading +/- 2% so give or take ~1mph.

My SatNav shows my speed, with a claimed accuracy of 0.2mph, and shows the car speedo as over reading by about 6mph at 70mph. Over many years of having a company car I've also driven many different hire cars and noted the the over read of the speedo does vary between about 3 to 6mph,

Again, I don't recommend anyone testing this in practice on the public roads :-)

[NoneSuch]

Re: Good

With an idiot behind the wheel, no speed is "safe."

I prefer the German method of speed control. You can go over 130 KPH on the Autobahn, but your insurance won't cover you if things go pear shaped at 131+.

[I am David Jones]

Re: Good

Not exactly. Above 130kph then a driver may be deemed to be partially at fault in an accident even if another driver is nominally to blame. Their insurer may also reduce the payout for damage to their own car if high speed is deemed to be a factor.

[Julian Poyntz]

Re: Good

The car I am getting as a ISA enabled, and during the test drive the damn thing kept on binging and bonging. I do know (from the sales rep) that there is a "favourite" setting which I can use to disable.

as for a speedlmiter as part of cruise control - yep, totally agree. Cruise is great, but in speed limited areas it is no use as the traffic flow moves from fast to slow and back again. It is too easy to be under the right foot and go with the flow and be over the said limit, speed limiter, no problems, accelarate and decelarte as needed and know you will not go over the limit (unless you kick down)

[Colin Bull 1]

The devil is in the detail

I am a great fan of cruise control - but in the present car the software is not up to the mark. I will set the CC to 62 MPH, but if I go down a gradual slope it will change down to slow the car to 62, even when the limit is 70, reducing efficiency badly.

And do not get me onto the auto cut out when stopped. WTF after the engine has cut out after I have braked to a standstill the engine starts when I put the handbrake ON. Seems perverse to me.

[BinkyTheMagicPaperclip]

Re: The devil is in the detail

What's your point? CC is a limiter, not a magic button. If you ask for 62 mph, you get 62 mph, it doesn't know the road limit is higher

I could definitely appreciate CC that works on slopes, a low speed limit on a fairly steep slope is one of the most annoying times to ensure you're within the speed limit, on the flat it's easy.

[LybsterRoy]

Re: The devil is in the detail

My Omega would brake going downhill, my Passat didn't nor does my Octavia - I preferred the Omega's system

[cyberdemon]

Re: The devil is in the detail

Presumably in an EV, the cruise control can be an absolute velocity setpoint, and it would hit the hill and maintain its set speed with more rigid precision than a funicular tram

But maybe they deliberately slacken off the control gains to make it 'feel more like cruise control'

[Mishak]

When I was working on ACC systems

We received feedback that "it doesn't drive like me" as it maintained the set speed on the level, uphill and downhill - a significant number of drivers wanted the speed to drop on the up and rise on the down!

It was implemented to maintain the set speed, and that's now it remained.

[MJI]

Re: When I was working on ACC systems

When towing I went up faster than down, so the caravan did not try to take control with side winds.

[John Robson]

Re: The devil is in the detail

"Presumably in an EV, the cruise control can be an absolute velocity setpoint, and it would hit the hill and maintain its set speed with more rigid precision than a funicular tram"

Pretty much - cruise control and speed limiter both work very well, because with a decent, and reversible, power source it's trivial to hold a speed.

[Natalie Gritpants Jr]

Re: The devil is in the detail

2021 Toyota Yaris owner. Its cruise control will keep the speed constant, which is handy for speed cameras at the bottom of hills. There is a bridge over a railway line near us that fools it - it floors it to maintain 30mph on the up, overshoots on the way down and emits a loud beep, shortly followed by "What are you doing?" from the seat mounted speed limiter.

The cruise control also slows down when getting close to cars in front, and will come to a stop if the cars in front stop. It's better than me at keeping a noticing the car in front is slowing, so makes for very easy driving in congestion.

You should calibrate your speed against Google maps with the phone not connected to the car, mine is 2pmh over at low speed and 3 mph over at 50 and above. I expect it will get worse as the tyres wear

[lglethal]

Re: The devil is in the detail

Just to throw in my 2 cents. We have a manual speed limiter in our car (VW ID3). So we set the max speed. This can be adjusted up or down by 10kmh with a click of a button on the steering wheel.

I find this system massively more comfortable on a long drive then cruise control. Why? Because my foot is always on the accelerator, which means that I can ease off the speed if approaching a corner, or see another driver acting sub-par. With cruise control I have to actively get my foot on the brake, and then faff about with getting the cruise control restarted afterwards.

There is another tech VW offer which tracks things like the speed of the car in front to maintain position, but we dont have that, and it doesnt particularly interest me, Adaptive Cruise control I think it's called.The straight up Speed Limiter, works just fine for us.

But having an auto set one, doesnt sound great unless it's seriously easy to modify. Having it beeping and distracting the driver, because it misses a roadsign, feels like asking for problems...

[ChrisC]

Re: The devil is in the detail

Yup, same thoughts re cruise control vs speed limiter from me too - every car I've owned over the past 20 or so years has provided cruise control, and it's remained almost entirely unused by me, because I utterly despise the way it leaves me feeling disconnected from the process of making the car progress along the road, whilst still requiring me to be ready to immediately jump into action and hit the brakes if the CC would otherwise happily propel my car into the back of some slower moving thing up ahead of me...

My last 2 cars have both also featured manual speed limiters, and they've been put to far more use, particularly when dealing with stretches of road with higher than usual densities of speed cameras, where you really wouldn't want to drift over the posted limit even for a fraction of a second at the wrong moment. The limiter acts as a second layer of protection for my licence by preventing the car going over the limit if my attention is briefly taken away from speed monitoring by other things (e.g. paying attention to the behaviour of another vehicle nearby which looks like it's trying to kill me - I really couldn't give a crap what my speed is at that moment in time...), without actively attempting to *maintain* a specific speed as cruise control would do, so as you note, the limiter doesn't prevent me from still being able to fine tune my speed with unconscious/instinctive movements on the accelerator.

And having seen how distinctly average the sign recognition capabilties are on the OH's car, I really wouldn't want to be reliant on that sort of tech for defining what the limit should be for feeding into an automatic limiter. Even GPS-based limit detection isn't without its limitations, so it will be very interesting to see what sort of feedback we get from owners of these new cars as they hit the roads and their drivers get a feel for how well the limiters cope.

[mantavani]

Re: The devil is in the detail

The adaptive cruise makes a reasonable stab, but using it on country roads results in my wife telling me I'm driving too fast (although it knows what's coming - hills, bends, roundabouts - I find it overestimates safe or at least comfortable cornering speeds) and occasionally misses posted limits. And I think lane assist hates cyclists and parked cars. But at least if you brake in your ID you know you're charging the battery rather than wearing out the brakes. Don't you drive in single-pedal/regen/B mode? In any case with all these assist features making our lives easier the main hazard I find on very long drives these days is the possibility of falling asleep due to complete boredom.

[Ragarath]

Re: The devil is in the detail

All electric cars regen when breaking (at least modern ones). B mode is not necessarily the most efficient mode to be in as it applies the breaking force too much. At least in my Peugeot. I dislike that when I have put the energy into making the car go forward, that it then brakes when lifting my foot off the pedal.

Remember that when using regen the car only gets back around 70% of the energy used to move it in the first place. Letting the car drift is better use of that energy, and when you break, well the regen is happening as it does in B mode. I really don't get the hype of B mode.

[Screwed]

Re: The devil is in the detail

I like the adaptive cruise control on my car.

Yes - I can maintain a steady speed over long distances and have many, many miles under my belt. But, for example, on a long stretch of 50mph motorway, I can set it and be sure I won't be speeding. At the same time, a lot of my attention is on what is happening outside the car rather than on the speedo. All too many switch lanes frequently, without indicating, and having speeded up a tiny but, then have to slow down. And switch back. Awareness of them is critical.

The adaptive bit works well at slowing if the vehicle ahead is going slower. It also works extremely well on hills. And, contrary to what some have said, it will even free-wheel in the right conditions to minimise fuel consumption.

[John Robson]

Re: The devil is in the detail

"And do not get me onto the auto cut out when stopped. WTF after the engine has cut out after I have braked to a standstill the engine starts when I put the handbrake ON. Seems perverse to me."

Are you sure it isn't when you release the clutch?

[SomeRandom1]

Re: The devil is in the detail

That could be it - an 2014 Insignia I drove did that. I'd pull up to a stop, car enagaged auto-hold and the engine auto-stopped. I'd shift into neutral and bring up the clutch and the engine would restart, run for around 10 seconds then auto-stop again. Garage claimed that was what it was supposed to do.

[sanwin]

Re: The devil is in the detail

I wish my CC kept the car at the set speed downhill! The car will speed up and the CC indicator will flash to warn me I am exceeding the set speed. (It does warn me at least - but so does the speedometer)

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: The devil is in the detail

I've had older cars (15-20 years ago) where the CC did that, but any newer cars I've owned, usually those with now-standard ABS, are quite capable of braking to maintain the preset limit when going downhill.

[Persona]

Re: The devil is in the detail

Some newer cars also have radar that allows you to set the minimum distance between you and the car in front so if the car in front of you slows below your set speed you do too without having to brake. When it speeds up you do too until you get back to your cruise speed.

[The Man Who Fell To Earth]

Re: The devil is in the detail

Even my 6 year old Subaru has dynamic cruise control, and does fail to control the speed properly on downhill as well as starts tracking the speed of the car ahead if it's setting is for a higher speed. Buy a car with post-1960 CC.

[Binraider]

Re: The devil is in the detail

My 2017 scooby manages fine. It sometimes needs help ahead of entering a steep gradient

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Good

Speed limiter on a vehicle has been my first thing to check for a long time - no speed limiter, no purchase.

I've had one in every car I've ever owned. It's permanently attached to my right leg and has always worked in conjunction with the car's rev or engine speed limiter.

Shame that current cars seem to want to default to cruise control rather than a speed limiter.

Actually if I had to have a car with a nannydriver, I'd want that linked to the cruise control. So if I were in Wales, it auto-sets the cruise control to 20mph so I can pootle around without scaring the sheep. Personally I don't really like either feature and I suspect it'll end up causing accidents. The idea that to override the speed limiter means having to stamp on the accelerator sounds dangerous. You press the accelerator firmly when you want to go really fast. Depends on car I guess but suppose I'm in a sporty little number and I want to overtake something going 60 on a 70mph road. A firm press probably means it'll end up going >70mph.

This seems pretty dumb. So someone sees a safe place to overtake, starts their manouver, car beeps at them, they stomp on the gas and by which point it's no longer safe to overtake. This could be especially FUN! in EVs with their high torque and acceleration. I guess it's been implemented this way because it's been the common way to override cruise control, but I've never liked that either. I want to be in control of my vehicles acceleration and deceleration, not reliant on some black box doing it's own thing.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

"So if I were in Wales, it auto-sets the cruise control to 20mph " And that's fine, because hitting things at 20mph is never dangerous.

Maybe, just maybe, having the vehicle not exceed 20mph, but also allowing easy control with the Mk1 right foot is better than having it stuck at 20?

"So someone sees a safe place to overtake, starts their manouver, car beeps at them"

That means it wasn't a safe place to overtake...

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Good

Maybe, just maybe, having the vehicle not exceed 20mph, but also allowing easy control with the Mk1 right foot is better than having it stuck at 20?

I'd prefer to be watching the road, not the speedo. When I'm in a 20mph zone, I find I have to spend more attention on the speedo. Accidents happen due to driver inattention..

That means it wasn't a safe place to overtake...

Says who? There's a subtle but important difference between safe and legal. So double white lines down the middle of the road might mean it's both unsafe and illegal. Issue is if you're part way through overtaking, lose power, car distracts you with beeps and haptics means you might end up kicking down and accelerating more than you might have intended. Maybe you end up exceeding 70mph while overtaking, but if it means you've overtaken safely and carry on at 70mph, what's the problem?

[John Robson]

Re: Good

If you can't overtake without breaking the law then it's not a safe place to overtake. Full stop.

In fact, it probably means that there's no point in overtaking anyway, since the vehicle in front is already doing close enough to the speed limit that it doesn't matter.

"if you're part way through overtaking, lose power..."

Well a) That's only one possible implementation, of four specified, under the regulation and b) then you didn't have enough space to overtake safely.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Good

If you can't overtake without breaking the law then it's not a safe place to overtake. Full stop.

In fact, it probably means that there's no point in overtaking anyway, since the vehicle in front is already doing close enough to the speed limit that it doesn't matter.

I'm guessing you don't drive much. Breaking the law is incidental to safe overtaking. But ok, suppose the vehicle is doing 50, or 40mph on a 70mph road?

[John Robson]

Re: Good

If you have a twenty or thirty mph overspeed available then you don't need to make that thirty or forty.

There is no need to break the law to overtake. The law even has explicit cases which change the regulations based on low speed of the vehicle in front (not that these change your allowed speed).

If you can't overtake safely and legally, then you follow, it's not rocket surgery.

[jospanner]

Re: Good

what is legal and what is sensible are not necessarily the same thing

[John Robson]

Re: Good

No - what is legal is often not sensible/safe.

[ChrisC]

Re: Good

"There is no need to break the law to overtake."

Not provided that a) the overtaker isn't trying to pull off an otherwise impossible overtake, and b) the overtakee doesn't take such offence at being overtaken that they actively block your attempts to either overtake them safely/legally, or to then drop back safely/legally behind them once you've realised how much they don't want you to get past them, only to then learn they're also now actively trying to kill you having been triggered by your lack of respect for their ability to make progress ahead of you

Sadly, the growing number of complete and utter morons who do feel the need to behave badly when overtaken (or indeed in pretty much every circumstance when they need to otherwise interact safely with another road user) is on the rise, so the need for otherwise safe and law abiding road users to be able to break the rules if that's what it takes to get themselves out of a scenario forced on them by the moronic actions of another, is also on the rise. Not saying that drivers should *routinely* break the limit just to facilitate an overtake, but there *will* be times when having the ability to do so could mean the difference between that driver simply being a successful overtaker, or requiring the services of an undertaker...

[John Robson]

Re: Good

"Not provided that a) the overtaker isn't trying to pull off an otherwise impossible overtake"

Erm - that would be an unsafe overtake...

If the overtakee is being an arse then that's still no reason to break the law to overtake - just don't.

There is also no suggestion here that you will be unable to do so. Active speed control is one of four options available to comply with this legislation, and even then it explicitly states that driver input takes priority.

It means you won't drift over the speed limit, it doesn't stop you driving like a pillock.

[ChrisC]

Re: Good

"Erm - that would be an unsafe overtake..."

Indeed, I was simply giving reasons from both sides of the argument - there are times when an overtake is performed unsafely/illegally due entirely to the stupidity of the person performing the overtake, but there ARE also times when the fault would lie entirely due to the stupidity of the person being overtaken.

"If the overtakee is being an arse then that's still no reason to break the law to overtake - just don't."

All well and good IF you know in advance of starting the overtake how much of an idiot they are...

[heyrick]

Re: Good

"There is no need to break the law to overtake."

I think far too many Frenchies would disagree. If anybody is doing a tiny bit under the limit, somebody will speed up to go around them.

Me? I drive a car limited to 45kph and it's like a red rag to a bull, I've seen some incredibly stupid things as people figure that going faster to go around me is far better than driving safely.

[jake]

Re: Good

"I drive a car limited to 45kph"

28MPH? That wouldn't be road-legal around here ... With reason.

It's an impediment to legal traffic, and a hazard to other drivers.

[heyrick]

Re: Good

Guess you don't have many tractors where you live...

Given the complete lack of useful public transport outside of urban areas, and the large distances involved, children from the age of 14 and older people who never passed a driving test (and those who lost their licence) can drive little cars speed limiter to 45.

As for road legal, there are two types of road that I am not allowed to go on. The autoroutes (motorways) and the routes réglementés (with a blue car sign at the entry, roughly akin to a dual carriageway). Both have minimum speed limits. All of the other roads can be used by slower vehicles. It's up to the other drivers to conduct themselves in a safe manner according to the traffic on the road that they are on.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: Good

When I was learning to drive 45+ years ago, the driving instructor was quite clear that briefly exceeding the speed limit when overtaking was completely acceptable, provided that you returned to it when the manoeuvre was completed. It ensured that you spent less time actually overtaking, which is inherently safer than remaining on the wrong side of the road for longer, simply to stay within an arbitrary limit which cannot be correct for every mile of a given road. Obviously you didn't start the manoeuvre, at any speed, if it wasn't safe to complete it.

That, of course, was in the days when people were actually taught to drive, rather than being taught to pass a driving test.

[MJI]

Re: Good

Time exposed to danger, keep to a minimum.

That meant on bikes hitting 80 past the cab of a lorry from a 40 start, then slowing back again.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

So I should drive through town, particularly across that blind crossroads at 150mph.... because less time in the junction means less danger....

If you can't overtake within half the distance you can see to be clear, and do so within the law, then wait.

[LybsterRoy]

Re: Good

I don't think there's a "pillock alert" icon but would you please have a look and if there is use it.

[ChoHag]

Re: Good

We're not in that world any more.

We're in the world where people sit at a red light forcing the ambulance behind them to slowly kill their patient because some people are more afraid of breaking a traffic law than performing murder by proxy. Computer says no!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good

Yes, but in fairness, we arrived in this situation when people started getting tickets for going through a red light in order to allow an ambulance to pass. Traffic laws in Britain are utterly inflexible "absolute offences". Even if your actions are completely reasonable and justifiable, that doesn't amount to a valid defence in court. If you committed the offence you have to pay the penalty, no matter what.

[blackcat]

Re: Good

A good part of this is because they won't release video or even pictures in some cases unless you plan to challenge it in court and people are rightly worried about the time involved and the risk if you lose. Another case for dash cams.

[Jason Bloomberg]

Re: Good

I had exactly that. Stopped at.a red light with a fire engine on my tail with blue lights flashing, sirens wailing. It was painful having to just sit there like an arrogant selfish cunt. That's not in my nature, but the law says that's what I have to do.

Those driving emergency vehicles are meant to understand that and use their greater legal rights to avoid putting either of us in that situation.

[jake]

Re: Good

Here in the US emergency vehicles will sometimes push idiots out of the way. There is a reason they have 1/4 inch thick steel bumpers.

_{Sounds like the driving laws in Blighty need a serious going-over ... are your politicians doing more important stuff?}

[Binraider]

Re: Good

You have been paying attention to brexshiy for the last 14 years? They couldn't even get that right despite it being the *only* thing on the agenda all that time.

The police don't bitch much cos it's speeding fines paying for the defined benefit pensions...

[ChoHag]

Re: Good

To their eternal credit the emergency vehicle drivers always looks exceptionally patient. It's my blood that it gets boiling.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Good

To their eternal credit the emergency vehicle drivers always looks exceptionally patient. It's my blood that it gets boiling.

Same. It's one of those crazy situations where administrative convenience and revenue generation trumps common sense. If there's an emergency vehicle trying to get to an emergency, make way for it. But we now have thousands of traffic light, box junction and bus lane cameras making money. There's no simple way to determine if a driver committed an offence to allow an emergency vehicle through, so revenue generation trumps public safety.

[jake]

Re: Good

As I said, the Law is an ass.

[nobody who matters]

Re: Good

<......."We're in the world where people sit at a red light forcing the ambulance behind them to slowly kill their patient because some people are more afraid of breaking a traffic law than performing murder by proxy".......>

That is because the law stipulates that you are not permitted to cross a red light. That is nothing new; it has always been the case.

What the law does allow is for the ambulance behind when running on blue lights, to cross the lights by taking to the 'wrong' side of the road. Obviously this requires a great degree of care and relies on any traffic coming the other way to be paying attention, but seems to have worked very successfully for the emergency vehicle on the occasions that I have witnessed it happen, and only delays their travel time by a few seconds.

Much safer than vehicles standing at the red light moving forward out of the way, which in most cases will be very likely to put them beyond the junction and partly into the path of traffic crossing in front of them through a green ;) Ambulances also have the very big advantage of a plethora of bright flashing blue lights and a very loud siren to warn other vehicles of their prescence whilst driving around the red light on the wrong side of the road, which the private car does not have to help it pull past a red light safely.

[ChoHag]

Re: Good

Or maybe just into the pedestrian crossing that is empty while the walkers watch from the side of the road waiting for the computer to say yes.

[heyrick]

Re: Good

The UK lives in a reality where consideration for the emergency services doesn't exist.

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/drivers-could-face-2500-fine-9283207 (you can be fined if you do the decent thing and get the hell out of the way)

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ambulance-driver-taken-court-speeding-33001180 (they can be fined for speeding)

Icon, because, fuck's sake, those blue lights are there for a reason. But hey, fining people makes revenue and that's all that's important these days.

[MarkTriumphant]

Re: Good

It was also mentioned when I did my advanced motorcycling course (although I have just realised that it was about 20 years ago, so it may have changed). The police rider who tested me said that I was not to look at my speedo when overtaking - that would obviously be more dangerous than just finishing the overtake.

[Justthefacts]

Re: Good

So, one of the key things when driving in another country, is to absorb the local driving culture. You need to drive “as expected”, from road position,overtaking, when to pull out, which spaces to park in, etc. Which side of the road, signs, road regulations, that’s the easy stuff.

Note: “As expected”. You’re getting downvoted by 4:1. What does that tell you about your driving safety? You are in the wrong *by definition*, as 80% of drivers are not wrong.

Just how badly wrong, is comments like this “ there's no point in overtaking anyway, since the vehicle in front is already doing close enough to the speed limit that it doesn't matter.” WTAF. When you’re overtaking you need to be going *at least* 20 mph faster and probably 30mph briefly. You’re going from car position at least 2 seconds gap behind to at least 2 seconds in front; call it 5 seconds total, at 60mph. If you’re only overtaking 10mph faster, that’s going to take you *nearly a minute* exposed to danger on the other carriageway. You are utterly insane and foolhardy and no idea how to drive a car at all. Please stop.

[LybsterRoy]

Re: Good

The only laws that are absolute are those imposed by the universe. Human made laws do not fall into that category.

[simonb_london]

Re: Good

And the reason we have to watch the speedo so much in 20 mph limit zones is because the road has a design speed of 30 mph (sometimes it used to be 40 mph) and it is feels unnatural and unnecessary to be driving so slow. On a 30 mph limit road I don't need to look at the speedo so much because I know if I drive based on the road type, location and hazard perception then I'll likely be within the speed limit. Speed limits used to be based on safety necessity now they seem to be based on politics.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

" On a 30 mph limit road I don't need to look at the speedo so much because I know if I drive based on the road type, location and hazard perception then I'll likely be within the speed limit."

So the ISA will have no effect on your driving, well done, join the club.

[jospanner]

Re: Good

Man, shut up

[nobody who matters]

Re: Good

20mph zones are a relatively new thing, so drivers are not used to the 'feel' of 20mph - they are used to the 'feel' of 30mph, and so their natural instinct is to settle at that speed.

It is I think, simply a question of training oneself to the feel of 20mph, and once you have done so you will find that sticking to 20mph without paying constant attention to the speedo will become quite natural to you (just as keeping to 30mph does already). Of course, there is also the question that 20mph is an artificially and unnecessarily slow speed limit designed principally to account for the abysmal standard of road sense and lack of proper training in how to behave on a road that is given to children in particular nowadays! But that is perhaps a discussion for another place and time. I say we need the return of Tufty Fluffytail!

[John Robson]

Re: Good

>> "Maybe, just maybe, having the vehicle not exceed 20mph, but also allowing easy control with the Mk1 right foot is better than having it stuck at 20?"

> "I'd prefer to be watching the road, not the speedo. When I'm in a 20mph zone, I find I have to spend more attention on the speedo. Accidents happen due to driver inattention.."

And if you didn't have to look at the speedo, because the car was keeping an eye on that for you... then you would be a safer driver, by your own admission. If you slip past the limit the car says bong, or vibrates the steering wheel, or just adjusts the feel of the throttle pedal...

This is exactly why they're a good thing.

[Like a badger]

Re: Good

Mr Robson, you obviously have a lot of time on your hands, and a singular fascination with your own viewpoint. Please, please, almost politely can you STFU, because I'm getting RSI downvoting your posts?

[Ragarath]

Re: Good

Sounds like you have a lot of time too ;)

[Screwed]

Re: Good

Maybe, just possibly, you might eventually realise that most roads (other than truly residential roads) in Wales do not have a 20mph limit. Despite what the clown Andrew RT Davies says, it is NOT a blanket 20mph limit across the nation.

Most days, I have one section between my front door and the nearest main road, all estate roads, which is 20. Often the entire rest of my journey is on roads with higher limits. I can drive right through town and out the other side only having been in 30 and 40 limits.

And there are still lots of roads which have a 60 limit which really could do with being dropped to 50, or even 40 in some places.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good

Same here, I welcome this coming standard on all cars. I don't own a car any more and tend to hire one when I need one. As such I drive a dozen different models a year and I'm always pleased to find one that has it. I don't go looking for one with the feature but welcome it when it has one, like Lane Assist or ABS.

Especially when driving in unfamiliar parts of the country or abroad it's one less thing to think about. And it's been six years since I last had a speeding ticket.

[MJI]

Re: Good

Don't like it and over 20 years here

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good

I have never had a speeding ticket in my entire life, because I pay attention to what I'm doing instead of palming it off to a computer. Every single one of these "assistance" features means less attention paid to the act of driving. Multiple studies have shown that every new assistance feature reduces driver awareness. Lane assist makes you more sloppy about controlling your direction, proximity alerts make you less attentive to what's going on around you, and now this speed controller will make you less attentive to your speed. It makes drivers more dangerous, not less.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

I also pay attention to what I'm doing - but I still see benefit in having supportive technology.

You're presumably anonymous because you don't want to out yourself as an ableist idiot?

For some people those assistance features are massively beneficial.

Of course I also have to assume that you disable ABS and other similar assistive technologies.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good

ABS and systems like it are not comparable; they only respond to active user input. ABS doesn't start braking when it thinks you should be slowing down, but only responds to conditions at the direction of the user. And before you mention it, it's also not comparable to cruise control, which is again a feature that is only activated at the user's behest.

Systems like this speed limiter wrest control of the vehicle from the driver, while conditioning them to rely on the automated "safety" features rather than paying attention. They allow the driver to become distracted more easily, meaning they are more likely to cause an accident by inattentiveness, but also attempt to intervene in normal manoeuvres, which causes confusion and frustration. The number of times I've seen cars bouncing between the lines, while the driver is paying most of his attention to a phone and relying on lane assist to keep him on the road, is far higher than I'm comfortable with.

[ChoHag]

Re: Good

Not only attention but responsibility. I have a mechanical car so what it does is my fault. If the computer is in control then does Elon go to jail when someone dies?

[jmch]

Re: Good

It's fine to be able to manually set a limiter to a preset value. It's a CHOICE the driver can make. I also have no problem with cars flashing some light and beeping if the limit is exceeded by a certain amount and/or for a certain duration, as long as it's not distracting. What I DO have a problem with is, the car doing that while it has no clue about what the speed limit really is. If it's using GPS, the GPS isn't always up to date (indeed my car GPS, motorbike GPS, and Google maps all have disagreements about limits in various locations, and sometimes all 3 of them are wrong). Not to mention that typically a dealer won't automatically update your car's GPS, nor do it for free. If this system is to work by GPS, there has to be free, over-the-air map updates guaranteed for at least 20 years included as part of the package.

If it's using road signs, it has happened very often that my car is showing me that it thinks a highway speed is 60 kmh because it detected the 60 limit sign on the offramp.

However much both GPS and sign-detection improve, there's always going to be differences between the 2, and between both of them and reality. So I am very much against any haptic feedback that cannot be switched off, and the car autonomously intervening should be absolutely not on the table at all (to be fair, that's what it says at the moment, but seems that's the direction of travel).

And of course, are we to expect that once all these safety systems are in place on all cars, it will be safe to universally raise speed limits everywhere except villages and town centres, right?

[toejam++]

Re: Good

I second this thought. Both my car and my wife's car include optical speed limit detection systems and they are both wrong about 1% of the time. That doesn't seem like much, but over the course of a week it adds up.

If vehicles are going to become judgemental and critique your driving, they better be spot on when doing it.

[Jimmy2Cows]

Re: guaranteed for at least 20 years included as part of the package

Guaranteed forever.

Speed limits almost never go up. There is a progressive trend to lower them everywhere.

The law is imposing an automatic speed limiter, capping your speed to what it thinks is the current speed limit. Therfore surely it must always be immediately accurate and up to date, everywhere, forever. Otherwise it's usefulness is limited and will simply encourage more and more people to override it, temporarily or permanently.

Any changes to speed limits anywhere in Europe (and the UK, because you can bet your arse we'll be getting this too, even if no one in government is saying so yet), must immediately trigger map updates, which must immediately be uploaded to all vehicles. That includes all temporary limits for roadworks. Don't even get me started on how this can possibly work for variable speed limits.

And it can't rely on reading signs as a hand-wavey fallback, because that doesn't always work in all lighting and weather conditions.

That's a massive overhead for all manufacturers, mappers, road authorities and highway maintenance. What's the betting that none of this is actually in place?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good

I disagree, completely.

They're all version 1. I had a car swerve from one lane to another by way of 'collision avoidance' without any cause whatsoever. At motorway speeds. Thank God the motorway was empty (which is what made it even more surprising, it made me think of the Gary Larson turbulence cartoon).

I already had near accidents because the car I'm driving now interfered with the journey. I'm going to focus just on the speed limiter, but whoever mandated lane assist should be shot in my opinion.

The problem is with all these gimmicks is that they're only able to work on a tactical, right here-and-now level and have no idea of circumstances, context or strategy. Worse, they're all version 1 and should not be tested on a live audience before being proven safe - or has the whole planet now accepted being a guinea pig for what a Brussels bureaucrat comes up who (a) is most likely chauffeured to work, sometimes even with a police escort and (b) will no doubt not have any of these measures fitted to his or her own vehicles because they're somehow special? Thank you Elon Musk for declaring everyone on the road a test object - this is what comes of it (well, OK, Microsoft started it by lobbing betas at people without testing but at least that didn't cause any direct physical harm).

Anyway, the speed limiter. First of all, the implementation itself. It draws its speed limit from GPS maps which are horrifically incorrect when it comes to that aspect (and have been for years, it's not a surprise) and observed road signs which means that if you're in a country where there are speed limits on off ramps it sees those too and applies that speed. That's jolly good fun if you're on the actual motorway in high volume traffic, trust me. Or when it spots the speed signs on the back of an HGV and applies those. These things are not smart, and, apparently, neither were the people who coded them, and evidently neither the people who made them mandatory. And want that data exported (which is also happening, allegedly 'anonymised' as fi that means anything without knowing where that takes place, who does it and how good it is).

Secondly, context. I am often in a motorway section where driving at the limit instead of slightly above causes a high volume of traffic to overtake me. I have tried, but the hard truth is that unless law enforcement actually starts enforcing the speed limit in that section, driving at the limit is actively dangerous because you prompt the most dangerous action in traffic: overtaking. In addition, if you were to travel at the same speed, said overtaking would take forever. If you need any evidence of that, observe HGVs overtaking each other. They don't do that slowly because they like holding up everyone, they do that because they do not have a choice. In case you think that overtaking then should not happen at all - again, observe HGVs when they are not allowed to overtake. The evidence is already there, and has been for years.

Last but not least, I have one child with various life threatening allergies, and I know how long an ambulance takes to get to us. If I am ever slowed down from getting my child to hospital in time there will be ugly consequences. And yes, I will gladly pay the speeding fines (I'll get back to that in a minute) if it means my child survives - and to be complete, I have had training for high speed driving (the reason you don't see me speed for any other reason than safety or emergencies - I did mention I value safety of me and others above anything else).

Now, the bit nobody wants to talk about as only keeping it covert makes their current use acceptable: fines. Fines have become a part of the income and even budget of provinces, cities, law enforcement et al. I am not going into how wrong that is and how it incentivises incorrect behaviours by law enforcement, the dry fact is that these measures will strip a source of income for these parties, and I don't think they'll get more money to compensate. Thus, expect more nefarious gaming to collect fines in different ways. While I'm on the topic, ditto for electricity used to power cars - a large portion of fuel costs were taxes, and there isn't a bureaucrat in the world who wants to be denied money to waste so expect that to change.

I am fully willing to accept that it differs for others, but I have already been driving around in cars with all this available, and it does achieve one goal perfectly: it'll get people off the road who enjoy driving.

If I want to get nagged, criticised and controlled while driving I'll give my mother in law a lift..

[DaveMcM]

Re: Good

I recently "upgraded" to a car with Lane Keep Assist and while I can see it might be useful on bigger roads (those with actual lines down the middle!), I live in the Scottish Highlands where I'm far more likely to be on a single track road than a dual carriageway (nearest to my house is approx 30 miles away) or motorway (157 miles away) and on these smaller roads lane keep assist has tried "assisting" me into hedges, walls and ditches more times than I'd like to count because the already narrow road has narrowed a bit more and it doesn't know what to do.

First thing I do after starting the engine is turn it off, but as per whichever law dictated it in the first place it will turn itself back on every time I start the car.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: Good

as per whichever law dictated it in the first place it will turn itself back on every time I start the car

Not a law, but NCAP "safety" standards. To get a 5* rating now requires that cars be fitted with so-called active safety devices, including lane assist, automatic braking, etc. If you can switch it off permanently (as I can on my 3-year-old car) you'd now get a lower NCAP rating, and no manufacturer wants the marketing disadvantage of that.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Good

Now, the bit nobody wants to talk about as only keeping it covert makes their current use acceptable: fines. Fines have become a part of the income and even budget of provinces, cities, law enforcement et al. I am not going into how wrong that is and how it incentivises incorrect behaviours by law enforcement,

It's precisely why they're appearing. The UK has a great wheeze that combines speed ticket revenues with 'Speed Awareness' courses. The courses are semi-mandatory but result in an additional 'fine' because the driver has to pay to attend them, and they're sometimes run by ex LEOs. A very nice little earner. Then the EU decided 'black boxes' must be fitted to all new vehicles, complete with mobile data and GPS. Reasons given have varied from 'helping the emergency services locate you in an accident'. Now they're 'speed limiters', which means a record of the driver exceeding the speed limit, and knowingly doing so by overriding the speed limiter. So next up will be automatically issuing speed tickets.

The big one is yet to come with long held plans to introduce road charging, which will be the major money maker.. Including for whichever IT shop gets the contract to run this scam. I mean scheme. The parts are all in place now.

[TheFifth]

Re: Good

My car has both cruise control and a speed limiter (optional). I can switch it to either CC or limiter, so the limiter doesn't operate in CC mode.

I have never used the limiter and only ever use cruise control. I don't drive like a maniac and have been driving for over twenty years without ever getting a ticket. I have never felt the need for a limiter.

However, after reading through these posts, I'm thinking I may have misjudged the usefulness of the limiter. When I first got the car and turned it on it defaulted to 70mph. I always use CC on the motorway set to 70mph as that gives me the option to creep above 70 if I need to pass one of those wonderful people who drives slowly, but accelerates as you try to pass them. I can also just press the pause button if I need to let the car gently slow down without braking. I couldn't understand why I would want the limiter to be on at 70mph as it seems less useful than CC. So I kinda dismissed it from that point onwards.

However, reading the above I can actually see that it could be useful on lower speed limit roads rather than motorways. I don't generally have an issue keeping to the speed limit, but I have to admit that from time to time, especially if traffic is stop and start, it is possible to creep above a low speed limit when you finally get going. Especially on several roads near me where the local council have decided to lower the speed limit of some large out of town roads, in the middle of nowhere, far from any houses to 30mph from 40 or 50. It's so easy to forget the change.

Thank you fellow commentaries, perhaps I'll give the limiter a try. My only reservation is I don't want it to make me complacent about keeping an eye on my speed.

[ArrZarr]

Re: Good

I'm an avid user of the CC button on my car, but the only time I've found the speed limiter useful was the time I was on the space saver spare tyre for a couple of days over a weekend last month. Being able to set the speed limiter to 50 (the rated top speed of the wheel) meant I could focus on driving rather than watching the speedo.

[John Robson]

Re: Good

"Thank you fellow commentaries, perhaps I'll give the limiter a try. My only reservation is I don't want it to make me complacent about keeping an eye on my speed."

No need for it to make you complacent - but it only does anything in the event that you slip up.

[Randy Hudson]

It's funny reading the comments from all the morons

Learn how to read. This feature is no different than a blindspot indicator. If you still decide to turn into the car next to you, go for it. Did backup cameras make everyone this upset? WTF

The reg is just calling this a "limiter" for clickbait purposes.

[John Robson]

Re: It's funny reading the comments from all the morons

"The reg is just calling this a "limiter" for clickbait purposes."

Yep - the active speed control is one of the four suggested implementations...

[Jimmy2Cows]

Re: The reg is just calling this a "limiter" for clickbait purposes.

Uh, nope, they're calling it what it is. What's your term for something that automatically limits a vehicle's speed, with no driver intervention?

Blindspot indicators and reversing cameras can be ignored with no action needed, foolish as that might be. These speed limiter cannot. You have to take some kind of action in response, and that depends on the situation.

Loss of acceleration on an overtake is one, especially if the driver you're overtaking suddenly decides to accelerate.

Suddenly applying the wrong limit is a far more serious problem. Remember that with the limiter active, how far you're pressing the accelerator does not match the reality of your speed. There's a good chance you're actually pressing the accelerator harder than you need to, to stay at the speed limit. So if the apparent limit increases, chances are you'll suddenly speed up with it, putting you over the speed limit through no fault of your own.

If the apparent limit decreases, your car will start complaining then automatically slow down to what it thinks is the limit. Not great if it drops from 70 to 40. In anything other than no to light traffic, there's a good chance you'll get rear-ended, or the vehicle behind you has to break hard and they get rear-ended. This is how pile-ups happen.

Only in these cases it's none of the drivers at fault, the so called active safety systems are the trigger.

[John Robson]

Re: The reg is just calling this a "limiter" for clickbait purposes.

"Blindspot indicators and reversing cameras can be ignored with no action needed"

As can three out of the four suggested implementations in the legislation, or didn't you read that far?

[mantavani]

Re: Good

You're assuming this system is idiot-proof, which is to underestimate the ingenuity of idiots. I have auto cruise on my car now, and occasionally despite being set at the correct motorway limit trundling along quite happily at 70, I'll pass something the upsets it - my favourite being a truck with Euro km/h speed limits, and as my car has a lot of pickup NOW YOU'RE DOING 90 MPH. Best bit is it tells you this on the dash with a graphic flash, and as we're visual creatures that's what pulls your attention first. Now I expect it every now and again I can catch it but it'd frighten the life out of my mum.

[Grogan]

Re: Good

What a small minded simpleton, that you can't handle having the choice. You'd rather have the nanny state cripple your vehicle.

[cageordie]

Re: Good

This reminds me of someone who wrote into Performance Car in the 80s complaining that he didn't feel safe over 50mph, so nobody should be able to go faster than that. The universal response was that if you don't feel safe above 50 then you shouldn't be driving. This is a you thing.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Good

"Shame that current cars seem to want to default to cruise control rather than a speed limiter."

Of all the cars I've driven with cruise control, they all also had a speed limiter. Usually on the same steering wheel switch, up for cruse control, down for speed limiter. Not GPS, road sign reading types, just the type where you, the driver, set a maximum speed.

[jds123456]

Re: Good

Intelligent cruise control keeps the car at the roads speed limit, reacts automatically by slowing to traffic and objects as well as alerting drivers to cars ahead that might be slowing abruptly. With lane assist technology and blind spot assist and you simply make driver a lot safer.

The tech isn’t infallible, poor road sign positions and occasional interference with GPS can result in misinterpretation of the limits, this will apply to this new limiter tech also.

Speed limiters just stop you going over a set limit. This is inferior technology.

[Binraider]

Re: Good

The number of downvotes is interesting, and reflects the number and type of people who routinely speed.

I have no qualms about 80-85 on an empty motorway, though I’m fastidious about lower limits or when it’s busy. There are few things that scream idiot more than the moron in some German motor doing 50 in a 30 and sounding like a badly released fart. You know who they are!

The obvious thing to do here is variable limits like in France; if conditions are good then allow a bit more; and vice versa.

Having invested ludicrous cash into dumb motorways; one would think repurposing those crappy systems to give us the hard shoulder back and allow variable limits I both directions would be welcomed by just about everyone.

[Sauraus]

Re: Good

My BMW X6 has a voluntary speed limiter on it and I for one am not sure it contributes to safety on the contrary I believe its dangerous, for the following reasons.

1) Outdated map data. A GPS based speed limiter relies on the cars map data and that needs to be absolutely up to date else you end up driving to slow or too fast and I've driven enough around Europe to know that when even big changes like a round about being in a place for 3+ years still isn't showing up in the cars map data today then speed limit changes are not going to either.

2) Missing or "forgotten" road (work) signs, I don't know if you've driven much on country roads in France and southern Europe but road signs are scares and optional especially on country roads its your guess as anyone's as to what the speed limit is on a road. And then there are the 'forgotten' road work signs which are left behind which wreck an absolute havoc on the camera based speed detection, see 3 below.

3) The instant acceleration and braking on posted signs! It must be absolutely horrifying for people driving behind me as my X6 slams on the brakes on each posted speed reduction, because again of the outdated map data above the car can't "know" in advance that a speed reduction is coming. The same goes for posted speed increases, the car just floors it when the onboard camera registers a speed increase on a posted sign.

So overall I'd say these systems are more dangerous than anything, and the 3 problems above are not going to be solved in the next 2 years which means we are going to end up with speed limiter systems that infuriate drivers as they constantly nag them about speed limit changes that are not real, and I for one believe that will actually distract people more and thus cause more harm than good.

[Ghoule211]

Re: Good

yeah my car thinks some roads using GPS and the KOFAS are 100MPH so we have that ;)

[The Man Who Fell To Earth]

Re: Good

What an idiot.

[FirstTangoInParis]

Re: Good

Good ish. I drive a Volvo that has this system, and as the article suggests there are shortcomings. The cameras have no idea how to interpret the UK national speed limit applies sign, though it does read roadside and overhead gantry signs with specific 60 or less speed limits, and makes assumptions about all sorts of roads. Hence a 70 limit becomes a 20 limit and so on. It also infers a countdown to a 30 limit means it’s already in one. Sometimes the GPS can drop out so it has no idea what road it’s on. It doesn’t remember the speed limit sign it last passed when you switch your car off, so it does a map lookup which is incorrect. Some way to go to get to properly working.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good

just another thing for the brits to blame on the eu.

[Joe W]

It's not the speed...

As a Norwegian ralley driver said "it's nto the fart that kills you, it's the smell" ("det er ikke farten [=speed] som dreper deg, det er smellen [=the crash]")

More precisely: it is usually drivers not keeping a safe distance to the car ahead. Usually dark coloured cars (=company cars). Yes, speeding is a problem, and ffs, if there is a speed limit then don't try to actively push through traffic, just because you want to exceed the speed limit by more than most people are willing to pay for. I enjoy driving in Switzerland, tickets are so expensive that most keep their speed to about 130km/h on the highway (120km/h is the limit). It is almost relaxing (except for the bits around Basel, too many Germans).

[Charlie Clark]

Re: It's not the speed...

True, but you can have both proximity and speed warnings.

At the end of the day, we don't need cars built to go above 150 km/h but, as long as there's money in selling the idea, then they'll still be built.

[Neil Barnes]

DO NOT WANT

See title.

If people are breaking local traffic laws, detect and punish them. Don't try and use technology that - per the article - manifestly doesn't yet work.

[BartyFartsLast]

Re: DO NOT WANT

It really does work though, I was amazed by how welly partner's Nissan Qashqai was able to work out speed limits and not just from GPS/maps but by actually reading road signs (temporary speed limits and variable speed limits)

Ditto for the Volvo I had.

The technology works and is useful.

[blackcat]

Re: DO NOT WANT

Eyeballs are also good at determining speed limits.

I'd love to see what a vision based system does in some UK motorway roadworks, especially in the smart sections. I have personally seen a section of smart motorway with roadworks where the physical signs by the side of the road say 50 and the gantry signs were also active and showing the national limit symbol.

[John Robson]

Re: DO NOT WANT

Pretty well usually - I don't know what I'd do as a human confronted with conflicting signs... what did you do?

Eyeballs are not all that good, because they are often focussed on other things at the time when speed limits change. An automated system never stops specifically watching for speed limit signs.

[blackcat]

Re: DO NOT WANT

I stuck to 50 as the roadworks had average speed cameras. This is a situation where you need more awareness than simply looking at the speed limit signs. It was a section of motorway with narrowed lanes, average speed check warning signs, extra speed cameras on poles and coned off areas.

As a human we can generally interpret the situation and disregard the false inputs. As I said in another post here the big test will be in court when someone tries to get off a ticket by claiming the car didn't warn them of the overspeed.

[John Robson]

Re: DO NOT WANT

That's not going to hold up in court, not even for a moment.

Now if you have conflicting signage, and preferably evidence of conflicting signage, then that *is* a defence (obvious other factors may reduce it's effectiveness).

Why do you think a speed limiter would cause a car to accelerate?

[blackcat]

Re: DO NOT WANT

I never said it would cause the car to accelerate, I said it would not warn the driver of the overspeed. If the driver sees 'national' pop up on their dashboard they will likely accelerate on their own from the previous reduced limit. I know what motorway drivers are like! I drive on the M25 variable section all too often and you see cars brake hard for the gantries with the cameras and then boot it again.

The old pocketGPS speed camera app used to have a total freakout if there was a speedcamera on a nearby road with a much reduced limit. On the motorway at 70 and it starts blaring out about a 30 limit and to slow down.

Proving poor signage is HARD! One of the reasons I have a dashcam.

Back in the 2000s there was a case of a very poorly signposted reduced speed limit in Southampton and a lot of people were eventually let off. They'd dropped it from 40 to 30, half-arsedly covered up the 40 signs, not put up any 30 repeater signs and the 30 sign at one entrance to this road was on a bend right by a big junction so far from ideally placed for obvious visibility. Court ruled unenforceable due to the poor sign placements.

[Jimmy2Cows]

Re: Why do you think a speed limiter would cause a car to accelerate?

Come on now, it really doesn't take much imagination.

With the speed limiter on, you stop getting sensory feedback from your foot pressure on the accelerator once you reach the limit. I know this anecotally, because I use my car's manual speed limiter around town all the time, and if I raise the limit a bit I usually don't need to change accelerator pressure. You simply cannot judge the precise accelerator pressure for a given speed when the limiter is capping it.

Now, I know that's only a sample size of 1, but at least I'm not just making this up without any experience behind what I'm saying.

So, rather than modulating foot pressure to manually maintain the desired speed, there is usually excess accelerator pressure to simply ensure the car stays at the set limit (be that automatically or manually set - the premise doesn't change), say for going up hills that would otherwise slow that car.

If the auto-limit suddenly believes the speed limit has increased, the car's speed cap is raised and that excess accelerator pressure means your speed increases. Depending on how powerful your car is, what gear you're in, and how hard you are actually pressing the accelerator, that increase can be sudden and significant.

The speed limiter has caused the driver to break the actual speed limit. Had the driver been managing their speed with their mk. 1 right foot, this would not have happened because their accelator pressure would already be exactly matching the speed they want to be driving at.

It's really not hard to figure that out.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Why do you think a speed limiter would cause a car to accelerate?

If the auto-limit suddenly believes the speed limit has increased, the car's speed cap is raised and that excess accelerator pressure means your speed increases. Depending on how powerful your car is, what gear you're in, and how hard you are actually pressing the accelerator, that increase can be sudden and significant.

That's why I think the idea of a 'firm press' or kickdown on the accelerator to override the limiter is potentially dangerous. I guess with modern cars, auto gearboxes and drive-by-wire throttle controls, this could be more manageable. But in a sporty car, especially at low speed it might just mean the car drops down a gear and goes faster than the driver might want or expect. Ok, the driver should become aware of what happens, but it'll probably end up lucrative for councils and speed camera operators.

[nobody who matters]

Re: DO NOT WANT

<....." I don't know what I'd do as a human confronted with conflicting signs"....>

That is a pretty damning indictment of your driving skills and knowledge of the Highway Code - you should already be aware that the temporary roadworks speed limit signs will take precedence over any other speed limit indication.

Obviously there is the proviso that there must be a traffic order applied for the temporary speed limit and the signs must be correctly placed and of the correct size and format etc. for the temporary limit to be legally enforceable, but as you don't have the option of instantly checking up on those things as you drive through them, you have to assume that all is correct and as it should be ;)

[BartyFartsLast]

Re: DO NOT WANT

You.missed the bit where I said "variable speed limit" then?

It goes to the lower speed if there's (an extremely rare) discrepancy but, as so many other people have said, its really easy to override.

Think of it as an extra set of speed limit signs and not some kind of challenge to your fragile mascinity and you'l live a much easier life.

[Csmy]

Re: DO NOT WANT

I’ve had rentals with it enabled. It’s fair to say the technology has a long way to go.

Off the top of my head I’ve seen -

Grey speed signs in the Norwegian tunnels ignored.

Speed signs on side streets picked up

Signs and the other carriageway picked up

Temporary speed restrictions that are in overhead dynamic signage unrecognised

Temporary speed signs for roadworks not recognised

End of speed restrictions (ie 40 with a cross) not recognised.

Think I’ll stick to paying attention and mk1 eyeball

[Chloe Cresswell]

Re: DO NOT WANT

My car has sign recognition (doesn't act on it).

The favourite of it's to do is when driving on the motorway, is to identify the 50 sticker on the back of an HGV as a road sign at the side of the road.

[Doctor Syntax]

What's the speed limit?

My new car also has one of those sign readers. Half the time or more it shows its "don't know" indication. I've seen it register a sign correctly and then go to "don't know" a few seconds later. At one local cross-roads a national speed limit road crosses a 40 road. Approaching from the former there's a NSL sign opposite for the other half of the road. It sees than and registers it even when turning onto the 40. I've also seen it show 30 on a NSL dual carriageway & 60 in a 30 area.

But the biggest difficulty is working out iif and where speed limits change in the lanes. Past our house it's a turn off from a 30 road & still 30 with street lights etc. Then the street lights stop. No sign. What's the speed limit? Turn left at the next junction and eventually arrive at a junction with a 30 road. Street lights start a few hundred metres before but no sign. Carry on instead and arrive at a cross roads where there is a street light, part of a sequence to the right & straight ahead. Turn left and no more street lights. What's the speed limit? A mile or so later it joins a road which is undoubtedly NSL but there are no signs. Instead of left turn carry straight on. After a few hundred metres the street lights stop. No sign. What's the speed limit? Carry on and join the same NSL road. Convrsely, of course, you can turn off the NSL road & end up on 30 roads without encountering a sign. Where do the speed limits start and stop?

How will it deal with crossing the Irish border with MPH on one side & KPH on the other?

BYW does anyone know if stretches of the A75 still have signs with different speed limits for HGVs & other vehicles?

[jmch]

Re: What's the speed limit?

"Half the time or more it shows its "don't know" indication. "

Honestly I'd much rather it displays 'don't know' than showing the wrong value!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: What's the speed limit?

.. or worse, actually acting on it.

Fun fact: whatever your car does, YOU are still responsible for the consequences.

IMHO the prime argument against all that rubbish.

[Kevin Johnston]

Re: What's the speed limit?

Re the A75, not sure about that but definitely in place on the A9 in Scotland. 'Trial' of 50mph for HGVs in certain sections suggesting that all other vehicles can travel at 60mph but my wife's car picks up the 50 sign and complains when she continues at 60

[The Bobster]

Re: What's the speed limit?

"How will it deal with crossing the Irish border with MPH on one side & KPH on the other?"

The brains in the ex-Macan dealt with it automagically, switching at the border using, I guess GPS.

[Alumoi]

Re: DO NOT WANT

Let me guess, Toyota Yaris, right?

Tested mine with the help of a friend dirving a van in front of me with all those useless 50/70/90 stickers on it.

Every freaking time my Yaris igonred the road signs and went for those on the van. Every. Freaking. Time.

[Boothy]

Re: DO NOT WANT

Got that feature in my car as well, and had all the above (well except the Norwegian tunnels, I'm in the UK :-) )

Similar to your 'other carriageway picked up', I've also had things like speed limits for works traffic being picked up. A specific example that's happened more than once is going through roadworks with lane closures, where works traffic are using those closed lanes. So I'll have say a 50 mph limit for my lane, but the car thinks it's 20 mph due to tiny little speed limit signs inside the roadworks.

Side streets is also a bad one, I regularly drive on roads that are say 30 or 40 mph, and the side streets are country side roads at UK national speed limit (so 60 for a car), so I'm in a a 30, but the car now thinks it's 60!

As such the car (VW) simply cannot be trusted to manage it's own speed, as I'd end up at 20 on motorways, or 60 in residentials!

Thankfully you can turn off all the audible and 'nudge' haptic stuff. But I left the onscreen warning on out of curiosity, just to see how often it gets it wrong, which is a lot. The dashboard always shows what it thinks is the current speed limit (often wrong), and puts a red line through it if it thinks you are speeding.

And don't get me started on lane assist!! (It literally tries to kill you!).

[Evil Scot]

Re: DO NOT WANT

I get the side streets quite a lot. Definitely on a certain roundabout.

* Beep * *Beep *

Looks at dash...

Looks at Centre console...

Eyes back on the road.

Now if the system read the CAN Bus it would see that I am signalling that I am still turning right and then, as the reduced speed limit sign leaves the left of frame, I am signalling left.

[Steven Raith]

Re: DO NOT WANT

Conversely, someone I know was driving through Wales, and when people were vandalising the 20mph signs to read 80mph, the cars active cruise was happy start trying to accelerate to those speeds.

I'm in a forum and a couple of discords with a fair few people who own/drive new cars, and are interested in them and the tech in them, and the suggestion that the tech behind it speed aware active cruise, cameras, GPS, etc - the same used to operate the speed limiters - works maybe 80% of the time wasn't argued by anyone across those; it seems to be about their experience.

80%, frankly, just isn't good enough for something being enforced by law.

I foresee high profile limiter fails (ie misreading a pooly located side road speed sign on a dual carriageway and braking from 70mph to 30mph unexpectedly, causing a rear ender at speed etc) and these regulations being looked at more closely across the board.

I don't actually have a problem with speed limiters per se; I drive a fairly modern, quiet car with an auto gearbox (my first) after fifteen years of fairly loud manual cars and it's taken me a while to get used to regularly checking the speedo to verify my speed is sensible, rather than gauging speed based on what gear I'm in and the engine speed as I previously had, and I use the optional, manual speed limiter quite a lot - so I'd not mind an automatic system, but if I can't trust the automatic system it to get it right every time, then it's utterly useless.

Steven R

Edit: I see someone is going around downvoting anyone with valid criticisms of regulations implemented before the tech is ready. What a very strange hill to die on. Poorly implemented regulation is poorly implemented regulation, regardless of your presumed support for it - you should want it implemented when it's actually usable and supportable, not when it can be sacked off for being crap, then kicked into the long grass for another decade.

[blackcat]

Re: DO NOT WANT

Some people just like the taste of boot :)

It will be interesting to see what happens when this is tested in court. 'I wasn't speeding cos my car let me go that fast'.

[Androgynous Cupboard]

Re: DO NOT WANT

I tried that once, in Mozambique in a 1965 Landrover which the unsmiliing man with what looked like a hospital X-Ray machine (but which he insisted was a speed camera) clocked me at something like 80mph. I'm not sure it would have hit that if we'd pushed it out of a plane, but my argument fell on deaf ears. As we had no working instruments and he had a machine gun, we paid the fine.

On reflection I will concede this is not a typical situation. Perhaps not much we can learn from it.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: DO NOT WANT

"80%, frankly, just isn't good enough for something being enforced by law."

See my post above - 80% seems pretty good!

"I see someone is going around downvoting anyone with valid criticisms of regulations implemented before the tech is ready."

Last time I looked this was primarily an IT site. One of the things a good developer learns (or used to!) is to question "what if" at very frequent intervals. What if the disk is full? What if the user enters an unexpected response? What happens if the item on an order gets nicked after it's been picked? If there are no good answers to these questions the software delivered will be at best unable to cope with the real world and more likely extremely buggy.

It's troubling when posts asking such obvious get downvoted in an IT forum.

If you can't produce a positive response (I'm assuming a lot of this activity is shilling) go back to your clients and tell them there are some serious issues they need to deal with PDQ.

[John Robson]

Re: DO NOT WANT

"80%, frankly, just isn't good enough for something being enforced by law."

Well, my current vehicles is far better than 80%, My only complaint is that it won't set to 20, it recognises it perfectly, it just says "too low for automatic adjustment" or some such rubbish.

Of course it's still trivial to nudge the stalk down to set it to 20, or to nudge it up on that section of road where it thinks the 40 starts about 100 yards further down the road than it actually does.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: DO NOT WANT

The technology works and is useful.

The technology does not work, and could only be said to be useful for drivers who aren't paying attention. Drivers like that should turn in their licences and use buses or taxis, which would improve road safety far more than any imperfect gadgets could do.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: DO NOT WANT

and could only be said to be useful for drivers who aren't paying attention

It's worse than that (no, not quoting Star Trek again :) ), it actively promotes not paying attention. Maybe I'm alone in this, but I found that having this tech active on a long journey makes it very tempting to do other things. Being a responsible driver meant that I killed that feature the moment I noticed that, and it's literally the first thing I switch off when I get in the car, followed by the speed alerting.

There's another problem with this rubbish too - it's horrifically inconsistent. You're driving in a city, moving across complex road layouts and all of a sudden, the stupid thing spots some lines and thus goes online after previously having been inactive because it didn't see enough of the road. Result: suddenly you get an unexpected yank at your steering wheel to get into the lane it has chosen for you and have to react really quickly to prevent disaster.

[Drax]

Re: DO NOT WANT

I second that. I noticed more issues with temporary limits imposed and never lifted than with incorrect interpretation

[Justthefacts]

Re: DO NOT WANT

How reliable the detection is, depends completely on the manufacturers implementation. For all I know, the Qashqai actually works. But there’s a load of them that are total car-crash implementations.

All of VW Polo, Honda, Toyota definitely fail in the following place I drive through regularly: on the motorway, there is a 30 limit sign visible on a parallel residential road. An alert flashes every time. Imagine if at that point in the road, 70% of all cars cut their power to go from 70mph to 30mph, exactly synchronised at one point. Mayhem.

My car detects the speed limit correct, about 95% of the time at best. That’s terrible, and totally unsafe to act on.

Or….how does the car know what “national speed limit applies”, when it is defined as 40mph only by the spacing of the lamp-posts. Or that it’s different when towing a caravan. Or that M25 can have different speed limits in different lanes according to the boards.

I’m actually a firm optimist in full self-driving at *some* point in the next decade, from *some* manufacturer. But a car that is not yet capable of FSD is also not capable of auto-limiting *safely*. All this category 2,3 driver-aid BS is a fantasy, and will endanger more lives than it saves. And yes I feel the same about lane-keeping features too.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: DO NOT WANT

<i.Or….how does the car know what “national speed limit applies”, when it is defined as 40mph only by the spacing of the lamp-posts. Or that it’s different when towing a caravan. Or that M25 can have different speed limits in different lanes according to the boards.</i>

Or outside schools which have signs saying "20MPH when lights are flashing". These devices cannot handle every situation, and can dangerously mishandle some, so better to train the drivers properly.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: DO NOT WANT

"when it is defined as 40mph only by the spacing of the lamp-posts"

It's never defined as 30mph by the spacing of the lamp-posts. It's defined as 30mph or 60mph (for a car, single carriageway) dependent on lamp-posts, unless otherwise posted. But yeah your point stands. I've driven a relatively recent Audi that auto speed limit detection, and it was probably only right about 60% of the time. Thankfully it just showed a red or green speed limit sign depending on your speed and what it thought was the limit on that stretch, and didn't try to intervene.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: DO NOT WANT

Volvo has never admitted that the incident I had should not have happened, but by pure coincidence is now working on an update after I forced the garage to report the incident.

In my opinion it no longer is the safest car you can buy.

[Charlie Clark]

Re: DO NOT WANT

I know plenty of places in Germany where knowing the current speed limit in heavy traffic is quite a challenge because it can change several times within a couple of kilometres. Anything that helps drivers, including changes to the rules about where you can put lower speed limits (the current ones are insane), should be welcomed.

Anecdotally, a friend of mine was very pleased to note that the navigation software Here defaults to advising you when you're exceeding the speed limit: "that should save me a couple of tickets".

[Jellied Eel]

Re: DO NOT WANT

I know plenty of places in Germany where knowing the current speed limit in heavy traffic is quite a challenge because it can change several times within a couple of kilometres.

Crazy idea. Convince councils/governments to stop doing that and cluttering roads with confusing and distracting signs. If human drivers can't figure those out, the machines have no chance.

Which also got me thinking. What if all speed limit signs were removed, and speed camera warning signs increased instead? Would the lack of speed limit signs and fear of tickets encourage drivers to slow down naturally?

[Charlie Clark]

Re: DO NOT WANT

The current law states that council's may only introduce speed limits around schools and other defined areas, at the distances are defined. For years councils have been begging to be allowed to set speed limits for the whole area but successive federal traffic ministers, including the current arsehole, have refused. In practice, this means that in many places the through road will go from the national speed limit to 50 to 30 to 50 to 30 to 50 and so on and back to the national limit in around 2 km. Blink and you will miss them. And these limits must all be signed! This is the same traffic minister who said that introducing a national speed limit on motorways, which would be generally popular, wouldn't be possible because of the lack of signs! If only he'd let councils set their own speed limits there'd be more than enough that could be used on motorways!

Regarding camera warning signs: that wouldn't really help as they're also expensive. And if you put them up without cameras, people would just document the fake ones. Also, I don't see how'd they'd help in the situation described where changes to the speed limit are in force. There are also limits on how many cameras you can put up. Honestly, a warning sound from the sat nav would be better.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: DO NOT WANT

Also, I don't see how'd they'd help in the situation described where changes to the speed limit are in force. There are also limits on how many cameras you can put up. Honestly, a warning sound from the sat nav would be better.

I know there have been experiments in traffic calming that have removed street clutter and signage. Idea being that drivers err on the side of caution and slow down. No idea what the results have been, but reworking streets would cost. But there does seem to be evidence where calming doesn't work, ie people braking and accelerating hard with speed bumps or between speed restrictions. It's also why changes to speed limits are happening, and if they're being overused. Roadworks should be obvious, other changes maybe less so. But there just seems to be waay too much street clutter appearing, confusing and sometimes contradictory signage that distracts drivers and driver assist features alike.

[Annihilator]

Re: DO NOT WANT

"speed camera warning signs increased instead"

I reckon upwards of 95% of those signs are bollocks though, to the point that they're not even noted by drivers any more, particularly given the prevalence of them - they're just background noise now. Increasing the number of them would likely amplify that effect.

[Strahd Ivarius]

Re: DO NOT WANT

Detection is fine, we got radar for that, but coupling them with missiles is still frowned upon for some stupid reasons

[Phones Sheridan]

My 2023 van came with this, and I find it very useful and have sailed past many hidden speed traps without getting a letter through the post, unlike my previous van. My only gripe is the system needs an ability to be calibrated. My van travels roughly 10% slower than the speed limit (when verified using GPS to work out the real speed versus what the speedometer says). This results in a tailback at best, and a 20 ton truck up my arse well within the minimum stopping distance at worst... frequently!

This law will be followed soon by the introduction of one mandating the use of a distance-enforcing system to maintain the gap between vehicles, as there will be a spate of speed-limit shunts where a speed-limited car travelling 2mph faster than the speed-limited car in front, closes the gap, and comes into contact.

[John Robson]

"This law will be followed soon by the introduction of one mandating the use of a distance-enforcing system to maintain the gap between vehicles, "

A) That would be a good thing

B) Why would it - this law doesn't mandate anything other than an alert that you're breaking a law.

In fact the legislation doesn't require the speed to be limited at all, option 3 just adjusts the weight of the go pedal - so it just feels like you're demanding a bit more torque.

[Phones Sheridan]

If you re-read the article, you'll see the sentence " and a speed limiter, will.". The last of the 4 options available to car manufacturers to implement the law, is indeed a physical speed limiter.

[Andy Non]

Mixed feelings about this

On the one hand it sounds like more things to become faulty with a car and annoying false-positives trying to slow you down when it has mistaken the speed limit or has out of date maps etc. There is also the sense of "how dare it interfere with my driving."

On the other hand, there are so many crazy nut-jobs driving recklessly, I nearly got ploughed down the other day while crossing the road with my dogs as someone flew past me doing around 70 mph in a 30 mph residential street. I barely had time to get out of the way.

[wolfetone]

Re: Mixed feelings about this

I've been sat at the lights at a pedestrian crossing and there has been a woman crossing the road in front of my car, and some almighty c**t in a Tesla shot past us in the lane next to me. She'd have been killed outright.

This speed limiter does nothing to stop cars running red lights. It does nothing to prevent dangerous driving.

[Andy Non]

Re: Mixed feelings about this

Yes indeed. I nearly got hit recently in the scenario you describe. Traffic lights on red at a three lane junction. Pedestrian crossing on green to walk, I was just walking across the second lane when *whoosh* a car shot through in the third lane. Had I been a couple of steps further on she would have hit me at 30/40 mph. She looked preoccupied talking animatedly to her passenger and I'm guessing she didn't even see the red traffic light in front of her and was looking at traffic lights 20 yards further on which were on green.

[wolfetone]

Re: Mixed feelings about this

Now you would think that everyone's time would be better spent on putting a camera on the car looking for traffic lights, and if it was going orange from green (or even red) it would slam the anchors on or alert the driver.

But no, we're more interested in making sure the car doesn't go above 30mph when running the red.

[Natalie Gritpants Jr]

Re: Mixed feelings about this

Cue "Just Stop Oil" protestors with orange lights

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: Mixed feelings about this

Can we have a special detector that accelerates in that case?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Mixed feelings about this

Only if you also activate the screenwipers at the same time..

[John Robson]

Re: Mixed feelings about this

"This speed limiter does nothing to stop cars running red lights. It does nothing to prevent dangerous driving."

No - and it's not designed to. It's designed to help people who aren't twats reduce the risk of their driving.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Mixed feelings about this

"It's designed to help people who aren't twats reduce the risk of their driving."

No. They're going to help people who are twats to pay even less attention when they're driving: "my speed limiter is on => I can't possibly be driving dangerously or creating risks for others".

[Alumoi]

Re: Mixed feelings about this

If you are not a twat then you do not need it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Mixed feelings about this

Yes, OK, but hold on, that is a TESLA. Musk has acquired special rights to be allowed this. Running over children and ramming emergency vehicles with their flashing lights is apparently a standard feature of Failed Self Driving.

What, he hasn't been given special rights? Why has this then not been recalled and banned?

[Sorry that handle is already taken.]

Physical sign recognition

I drove a current model hire car recently that had this feature. It made the following mistakes in the few days I had it:

1) "End 50 area" was interpreted as 50.

2) "80 ahead" was interpreted as 80.

3) School zone signs were interpreted as 40 at all times of day.

We also have signs on the highways informing drivers entering the city of the blanket residential speed limit, but I didn't get a chance to drive past one of those.

Pretty half-baked technology.

[Dan 55]

Re: Physical sign recognition

Cars with this feature will also be sold in Northern Ireland, yet this is the only place where mph speed limits are on one side of a wiggly windy border and kph speed limits are on the other side. I wonder how that's going to work.

[John Robson]

Re: Physical sign recognition

If only they could tell where they were and respond accordingly.

Haven't taken my car anywhere with the "wrong" limit signs, but the previous car just handled it.

[Dan 55]

Re: Physical sign recognition

If only they could tell where they were and respond accordingly.

Challenge accepted:

Belfast Live: Border lines between UK and Ireland

[My other car WAS an IAV Stryker]

Re: Physical sign recognition

"I wonder how that's going to work."

My prediction: poorly. (Especially given the 20% or so of comments I've already read.)

[Csmy]

Re: Physical sign recognition

“School zone signs” , sounds like Oz? I forgot about those, our rental didn’t understand them too well

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Physical sign recognition

I've had situations where my Volvo EV told me that it was OK to driven 120km/h there.

Within city borders. With all the proper signs visible that that ought to be 30km/h.

The only reason my car was driving 30km/h regardless is because Mark 1 eyeballs + brain DID spot the multiple signs and thus slowed down from the 50km/h that is the default in most cities.

[Julian Poyntz]

Speeding often not the issue

Most problems I see (and there was a fatal accident hear me recently) are caused by bad driving - nothing to do with speed. Don't get me wrong, there are many cases where speed is a problem, but often it is bad driving by one of the parties involved. And then there pedestrians. They do not look and just cross. I have lost count of how many accidents they have nearly caused me on my motorbike (and there is no speeding involved, just me in a bus lane or legally filtering - which you do not speed as it is too dangerous in London)

[John Robson]

Re: Speeding often not the issue

So this does nothing in London... and that's a problem because?

[Kevin Johnston]

Re: Speeding often not the issue

I am frequently shouted down because I dispute the 'Speed Kills' propaganda. My opinion is that it is inappropriate speed that kills which could be 30mph in a 30mph limit if it is raining heavily and schools are kicking out round the corner and you are passing the junction which connects between the school and a local housing area.

All the time we permit manual control of vehicles there will be a portion of drivers who ignore/bypass any limits or safety measures so once again your are impacting the basically obedient ones significantly from a cost perspective (travel time, repair of extra complex systems etc etc) while having no impact on the portion who need slapping down

[REGriff]

Re: Speeding often not the issue

I agree. It is inappropriate speed that is the problem.

I lived in Montana USA and for many years the speed limit on the highways was "reasonable and prudent". I had a Mercedes sports car (with high speed tires) and generally drove at about 105 to 120 MPH. I would on occasion get passed by cars going faster. I never saw accidents on the highway (outside of winter) in all of the years I lived there (20 years), note, I said on the highways. For those of you saying I was lucky a highway patrol didn't see me, they did often, and never even flashed their lights at me. I could add that I have not received a speeding ticket or warning in 50 years. Wyoming did have speed limits but never enforced them on the highways, weather sometimes got those that did not understand inappropriate speed in a damn pickup truck (snow, ice, wind).

On the other hand, in town the 'natural' speed limit may be much slower than the posted 25 MPH speed limit. I have also been passed in residential areas, with a 25 MPH limit, which I felt was too fast due to the conditions (parked cars, kids playing, dogs, etc).

Probably none of this is applicable to most of Europe, but I wanted to agree the "Speeding is often not an issue comments". You can kill a person or an animal driving at 5 MPH if you are not paying attention.

And now for something completely different, the American actor Robert Redford got a speeding ticket in Montana while he was filming a movie (Horse Whisperer ?). He argued there was no speed limit. The officer said there is "reasonable and prudent", and 100 MPH in a pickup truck on a gravel road is neither.

[ChoHag]

Re: Speeding often not the issue

> you do not speed as it is too dangerous in London

Or you just can't.

One fond memory from the Covid days was getting into third gear around Marble Arch. I don't think that will ever happen again.

[Julian Poyntz]

Re: Speeding often not the issue

Sorry, what I mean is that when filtering it is not easy to speed (more than 10mph) as the roads are too narrow, especially with all the cycle lanes,

There are some exceptions

Now that a lot of London roads are 20mph, it is reverb easier to get caught speeding

[ChoHag]

Re: Speeding often not the issue

> when filtering

Oh, on a bike. My bad.

> it is reverb easier to get caught speeding

"much"?

That would require the police to be out doing their job. Can't remember the last time I saw that.

[Sorry that handle is already taken.]

Re: Speeding often not the issue

Higher speeds self-evidently make collisions more likely and more severe. Even where speeding didn't cause the circumstances that led to a collision, it made the eventual collision more difficult to avoid and the consequences more serious.

That's why speed limits exist. They're not "you're safe below this number and unsafe above it", they're "we've determined* that the level of risk and the effects are acceptable below this number".

* Or perhaps decided

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Speeding often not the issue

That's why speed limits exist. They're not "you're safe below this number and unsafe above it", they're "we've determined* that the level of risk and the effects are acceptable below this number".

Most speed limits were set in a time when cars were very different and far less safe. Plus events like the US Oil Crisis. Absent driver ability, it's safer to drive a modern car at 100mph than it was in the '60s or '70s. Downside is features like driver assists and general designs like menu selections rather than physical controls are providing more distractions and making cars less safe.

[Sorry that handle is already taken.]

Re: Speeding often not the issue

Do you think perhaps the fact that speed limits haven't been increased as vehicle safety improves might be an indication that regulatory authorities are happy with letting safety improve, rather than increasing speed limits to cancel out those safety improvements?

Road design standards march on too. Many roads that were built 50 years ago and are signposted 100 km/h don't meet current 60 km/h design standards.

[Jimmy2Cows]

Re: Speeding often not the issue

Bollocks, that would be inappropriate speed, rather than an absolute number. It's situation specific.

100mph on an empty, straight, dry road has a pretty much zero collision risk.

30mph on a wet or icy road with bends, parked cars, and opposing traffic has a far higher collision risk, despite the absolute speed being lower.

Speed alone does not kill. Inappropriate speed kills. And even then, the actual statistics for how many people are killed as a result of speeding is tiny. The most recent number I saw for the past year was under 20 for the entire UK.

Forcing an expensive change using provably fallible automatiion technology, for such a tiny number, seems wildly disproportionate. And I do you the manual speed limiter in my car. I like it, and I use it a lot. Because it is manual, I am in control of what it does, and if the limit is wrong that is on me. There's no chance of it misreading something and setting the wrong limit.

More people die falling down the stairs at home. Maybe we should impose a step limit for stairs.

Far, far more people die from alcohol-related causes evey year. Several orders of magnitude higher. But we don't set an alcohol consumption limit.

[Sorry that handle is already taken.]

Re: Speeding often not the issue

Speed alone does not kill.

Yes; my point. It's a contributing factor and, as far as levers that regulatory authorities have access too, one of the most cost-effective ones. It costs a lot more to rebuild a road or add/improve safety features than it does to adjust the speed limit.

[Andy 73]

Direction of travel

"While it is important to understand that the technology is still a driver aid and can easily be overridden, it is not hard to detect the direction of travel"

That's a relief, because negative speed would surely really confuse the system.

[Androgynous Cupboard]

Re: Direction of travel

Not hard, but not flawless. I suffered 80km on a French motorway with the car beeping furiously at me telling me I was driving the wrong way and no way to disable it (in a Kia EV6, which otherwise I love). I think it got confused when leaving a charging station. A driver aid it most certainly was not.

[Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch]

My speedometer reads 100 km/h when I'm doing 91. How does this tech deal with that?

[Chloe Cresswell]

Sounds like it's in spec then.

[A Non e-mouse]

It doesn't. But your speedometer clearly needs fixing.

[GioCiampa]

As far as I'm aware - all (non-GPS-based) speedometers are deliberately set to show a speed slightly higher than reality.

No idea if that's a legal thing, or just an attempt to prevent a certain amount of speeding by those who aren't aware.

[GioCiampa]

(One Google later...)

"The UK law is based on the EU standard, with some minor changes. A speedo must never show less than the actual speed, and must never show more than 110% of actual speed + 6.25mph. So if your true speed is 40mph, your speedo could legally be reading up to 50.25mph but never less than 40mph."

(My car reads about 5% high, compared to GPS)

[Neil Barnes]

Last time I looked at UK Regulations for Motor Vehicles on the Queen's Highway - many years ago, now, the rule for speedos was no more than 15% over actual speed, no less than actual speed. Given that at the time the mechanical speedos had something of an S-shaped response curve, I suppose most makers just aimed for +7.5% at a nominal speed - 50 or 60mps.

Personally, I _hate_ instruments that lie to me (don't get me started on petrol gauges to the nearest ten litres!) but I guess that's just my engineering showing.

[Chloe Cresswell]

For the speedometer not to lie to you, it would need to know the wear level on the tyre to compensate for that. There's 1mph difference on my car between new tyres and the legal limit.

[John Robson]

Or it could use GPS as a continuous calibration aid.

[Boothy]

Or just have it auto calibrate from GPS, assuming it has GPS of course, which most cars other than the cheapest options seem to do these days.

[Chloe Cresswell]

Given at time my GPS says I'm doing 110mph at 68.8, due to reflected signals, you might not want to use that uncalibrated source as a calibration source.

[Chloe Cresswell]

It's a legal thing. If you make 400,000 vehicles, do you test every one, or test a batch with them all over reading by say, 4%, at which point they are all legal.

Plus, what speed are you doing? The speed my car reports from the wheel sensor varies by 1mph between a fresh set of tyres, and one at the legal limit of the tread, the offset on the speedometer compensates for that too.

[Sorry that handle is already taken.]

I would expect the variance in the speed sensors to be tenths of a percent, not full percentage points.

[Chloe Cresswell]

Which sensor on your car measures the change in diameter of the tyre as it wears?

[Sorry that handle is already taken.]

The point was that two of the same car, with the same brand new tyres, should not measure speeds with 4% variance. The speed sensors aren't that inaccurate.

[DoctorPaul]

My understanding is that back in the day when speed limits were first introduced, the speedometers could only manage +/- 10% accuracy (I'm old enough to remember Smiths chronometric speedos) so to be legally fair you had to let someone be 10% over in case their speedo was reading 10% under.

Roll on a few years and speedo accuracy obviously improved, but funnily enough I swear that every car sold has a speedo that reads 9% over! The basis of most 1960s claims of having "done the ton" of course.

[Sorry that handle is already taken.]

Mine's out by a similar margin. It's so far out that it's actually non-compliant with the relevant Australian Design Rule, but the manufacturer refuses to fix it.

An OBD-II scanner shows the same speed as a GPS device, so the ECU knows how fast the vehicle is moving, it just displays well out of spec information to the driver.

[Caver_Dave]

Yes, mine does the same. I know how far mine is out and set the limiter to 20 in a 20, 32 in a 30, 43 in a 40, 53 in a 50, 64 in a 60 and 76 in a 70. All are correctly on the limit according to GPS and the ECU.

I use the manually set limiter all the time. It allows me to spend my time looking at the road, other road users and potential hazards, not constantly checking if I have accidentally strayed a little over the speed limit on a down hill.

It is especially useful in my electric car that has no engine sound for you to calibrate your speed with.

[shade82000]

This is all interesting to read. I drive a van and always wondered if larger vehicles were deliberately calibrated to make unsuspecting drivers go a bit slower, because you know the van driver stereotype.

I drive 99% on single carriageways and like to set the speed limiter to the 50mph limit for commercial vehicles on those roads, because it's a kinda heavy and dangerous thing.

The last 3 vans I've had were all calibraed so that actual 50mph was 54mph on the speedo, and 30mph is 32mph. This is easy to figure out after a while because those flashy signs with smiley faces tell me how fast I'm going, and when I go through average speed camera sections, everyone else slows down to exactly 50mph while my speedo shows 54mph.

It's just the speedo though, I have to set the speed limiter to 54mph to make it drive at 50mph.

[Azamino]

What did the mechanic say when you took it to be fixed? I mean, you have tried to get it fixed haven't you?

[Doctor Syntax]

It probably needs a S/W update that doesn't exist. Less and less of this stuff is inaccessible to your local garage. John Deering is now standard practice.

[sanwin]

On my last three cars the GPS checked 30mph shows as 32 on the speedo and the CC, 60mph shows 63, and 70mph shows 74. So in every case the car would be limiting me to at least 2mph below the actual limit. Driving through the smiley/frowny warning signs at 32 indicated I always get the smiley. The annoying thing is I can't set the CC to 20mph when required - it is too low for the CC system!

I guess if the new systems use GPS to work out the speed limit, maybe they'll also use the GPS to monitor the car's actual speed. I drive through villages with 30mph limits with the CC on which tends to annoy the boy racers coming up behind me. As to speed limiters, on my last car there was no way to override the limit short of turning it off - not good at 30mph going into a faster zone.

[simonb_london]

All speedos read about 10% high. Unfortunately the speedo gives a political, rather than a scientific, reading. The most important measurement instrument the car is defective. By design.

[Chloe Cresswell]

At 70 my car reads 74. I didn't know that was 10%. Of course, that percentage will vary as the size of the tyre changes slightly over its life with wear. I'm wonder how you are preposing to detect and update the speedo on the fly for that? The simple solution of having it over read so it is legal in all normal circumstances of driving on the road does seem to be the simplest.

[Pascal Monett]

So, now it's speed limiters

And the next step to the nanny car will be what ? No shirt, no ignition ?

If I can't drive the way I want to, just give me private taxi that will do the job while I read a book.

Butm if I'm at the wheel, I decide what the car does and I'm responsible for it, not some effin' nanny back-seat driver.

[John Robson]

Re: So, now it's speed limiters

You've never been allowed to drive "just the way I want to"

And I do hope you've disabled your ABS, your air bags, power steering, servo assistance etc...

[ArrZarr]

Re: So, now it's speed limiters

The second half of your sentence is reducing OP's post to absurdity.

ABS, TC, Servo Assistance and Power steering give us more control over the car, in the sense that they amplify our ability to do what we intend (Hard braking without locking up, booting it to pull out at a junction without wheel spinning, react quicker to situations).

My understanding of what's being discussed is that it's taking decisions out of the hands of the driver.

Currently, if my car hits another car, I am liable. If my car is speeding, I'm liable. If my car hits a child on their way home from school, I am liable. If my car does something weird & wacky at a junction and causes somebody else to hit me, I am probably liable.

When I stop being liable for the above situations, I will let the car make decisions on speed and steering. Until then it's my responsibility to drive well and do my best to ensure none of the above situations happen. To do that, all I ask is to be able to control my car with the assists I choose to use.

[Steve Button]

Nominative determinism?

Richard, it's like you were born to write this story!

[Azamino]

Well overdue

If I hire an electric scooter in Bath the speed is capped depending on where I am, the same tech' should be applied to more dangerous vehicles.

Driving can be fun and if you especially enjoy speed book a track day and see how you compare to the track record for your age, vehicle class etc.

[GioCiampa]

Re: Well overdue

That reminds me of an old episode of Top Gear where Clarkson was driving a GT-R around Japan... the car knew where it was and automatically switched off all the limiters when he arrived at the Fuji racetrack.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Well overdue

That was an advertised feature of the GT-R which AFAIK never actually made it into the final production cars. You have to take them to a Nissan dealer to prepare them for racing (ie, turn off the legally mandated 180km/h limiter).

[GioCiampa]

Re: Well overdue

Fair enough - wasn't aware of that part.

[Licensed_Radio_Nerd]

Made a better idiot!

Driver aids seem to make for a better quality idiot. This is probably down to dropping the standards here in the UK. You used to need to pass the Advanced Driver training with "Gold" before you could become a driving instructor. I see the effect of this daily driving between home and Cambridge. Lane hogs on the A14; vans drivers that either do 40 everywhere, or 90; EV drivers either in the way (lack of charge) or breaking every speed-limit; and long snakes of traffic stuck behind the van doing 40 as no-one seems to know how to overtake any more!

I would like to see driver aids banned. No more air-bags, no traction control, and no ABS. Learn to drive properly where those things are not needed. And yes, grumpy Gen X here whose first cars did not have ABS or air-bags; and who will be avoiding cars with these idiotic gadgets - or finding a way to disable them! Insulating tape on the cameras and a thin sheet of lead (Pb) on the GPS aerial should do it!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Made a better idiot!

Put a large spike in the centre of the steering wheel!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Made a better idiot!

Only if you have seat belts that will held the driver in place, unable to avoid said spike.

[jake]

Re: Made a better idiot!

"Put a large spike in the centre of the steering wheel!"

So when a driver runs a red light and you T-bone him while doing the speed limit, you die and the (probably drunk) red-light runner walks away unscathed?

What a brilliant plan.

[John Robson]

Re: Made a better idiot!

"I would like to see driver aids banned. No more air-bags, no traction control, and no ABS."

Having made emergency stops in vehicles both with and without ABS (successfully in all cases except one) I'd far rather have ABS than not.

The one case where it didn't work was in snow, and the ABS just stopped me braking at all (and the handbrake was on the front wheels), so I ended up having to accelerate through a red light into a fortuitous gap on the roundabout ahead.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: Made a better idiot!

ABS is not designed to improve braking efficiency, it is designed to prevent the wheels locking under hard braking, so that you retain steering control and can more easily avoid an obstacle. A car with ABS won't stop faster than one without, and on snow it may actually take further to stop since the best braking in soft snow can happen when you build up a wedge of snow in front of locked wheels.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Made a better idiot!

> A car with ABS won't stop faster than one without

Is this is one of those "when driven by an average sheep in a spherical vacuum" type Physics exam questions?

[jake]

Re: Made a better idiot!

"The one case where it didn't work was in snow"

Driving too fast for road conditions, eh? Somehow given your other posts here I;m not all that surprised.

Have I suggested you should get off the road before you kill somebody yet?

[Ball boy]

Cost added to production to exclude the UK? Really?

The RAC road safety spokesperson Rod Dennis said: "While it's not currently mandated that cars sold in the UK have to be fitted with Intelligent Speed Assistance (ISA) systems, we'd be surprised if manufacturers deliberately excluded the feature from those they sell in the UK as it would add unnecessary cost to production."

Eh? If the car doesn't know where it is, this system fails - so it should be a fairly trivial, one-off task to write a firmware function that disables the feature if it's not mandated in the country the vehicle is currently in. Hardly an added cost to production. Perhaps this RAC chap thinks the car would need to have some critical component/s retrofitted just to make it usable in the UK or wherever.

I'm neither for or against the idea of some form of ISA but, as a driver of some years, I get the impression driving standards are slipping. Not sure tech alone can do much to enhance them.

[IamAProton]

Re: Cost added to production to exclude the UK? Really?

driving standards are "slipping" and cars are getting too easy to drive.

I'm not against a speed limiter on cars BUT:

- speed limits needs to be appropriate to the kind of road and modern vehicles, not the maximum speed to drive safe in any kind of car. Eg: if you have an old fiat 500 you might want to go a bit slower than the maximum allowed speed limit.

- need to find a solution to prevent muppets to create risky situations like going too slow for no good reason and creating long lines of cars that inevitable will have to take risk overtaking.

I drive some fairly busy roads on my daily commute and what you see every day is appalling: overtaking in highway with a speed delta of 2km/h, not using the rightmost available lane (while driving slower than speed limit and having cars behind), lack of basic understanding of how a roundabout works, acceleration lane not used (merge into traffic while being much slower)

As a first set of measures to improve the traffic conditions i would suggest the following (just for the sake of being radical):

- ban the A/C in cars. Uncomfortable cars will be used more sparingly

- ban powersteering

- ban compact cars, they lower the bar for driving and make 'too convenient' using the car when bike or public transport would be better. cars shall not be smaller than 1.8 x 4.5 meters.

[tiggity]

Re: Cost added to production to exclude the UK? Really?

IamAProton

"- ban compact cars, they lower the bar for driving and make 'too convenient' using the car when bike or public transport would be better. cars shall not be smaller than 1.8 x 4.5 meters."

No - for the last decade approx I only drive small cars (my last was one you mentioned, a Fiat 500, current is a Peugeot 108).

I no longer need a big car (usually only myself & partner in the car, occasionally a relative, i.e. no need to hold lots of people or luggage), so drive a far more fuel efficient car, greener & cheaper.

Plenty of people live in terraced urban streets, where as soon as a few households have > 1 car (that's a bad thing but a different issue) then finding space to park your car near home can be a PITA and so small cars help chance of parking (& if you are mainly doing urban driving you do not need a big car)

It's not great on the motorway (it can cope OK at a speed of 70 unless really bad weather conditions, but that's the same for most cars), issue is slow acceleration, need to wait for a big safe overtaking gap to get past HGVs in the left hand lane when joining Mway).

A small car could arguably encourage safer driving: It is more vulnerable, that should incentivize the driver* to be more aware of risk more than someone driving a more robust vehicle such as a Chelsea tractor, & drive more sensibly.

* though some drivers just don't care

[IamAProton]

Re: Cost added to production to exclude the UK? Really?

I think you missed my point. if cars were not so 'convenient' and easy to drive, a lot of people would not drive them in the first place.

I would argue that probably big cars would reduce pollution overall. (and of course it was for the sake of making a bold statement)

I lived in asia for several years. I was not riding my small motorbike (which was rotting away while parked) because it was too much of a pain to find parking. I was using the subway and rental bikes, can't even imagine driving a car there. (And i usually ride motorbike as much as i can, have over 100K km under my belt)

[Jimmy2Cows]

Re: As a first set of measures to improve the traffic conditions i would suggest..

No need for such stupid suggestions. This country (UK) has terrible public transport outside London and Manchester, and is hopelessly impractical for a lot of journeys. We have the wrong kind of weather most of the time to be out in the elements. Public transport can only be fixed with massive investment, so not going to happen. Even TfL is struggling to make ends meet and London has arguably the best public transport service in the UK. The weather is a simple fact that cannot be changed. Just accept it rather then living in a fantasy land where everyone walks or rides a pushbike. Cars are here to stay.

Driving standards are slipping, so the obvious things to do are:

1. Teach drivers to actually drive, not just to pass the test.

Awareness of surroundings, prediction of what other drivers are going to do.

2. Make the test harder, more comprehensive.

3. Mandatory retests at some interval, say between 3 and 5 years.

For everyone who thinks they're already a brilliant driver, now you could objectively prove it. A retest should be no problem.

4. Using a handheld phone (or similar) while driving should be an instant 12 month ban, none of this 6 points compromise. Treat it like drink driving. It's just as dangerous. Repeat offences get progressively longer bans.

[IamAProton]

Re: As a first set of measures to improve the traffic conditions i would suggest..

As stated in my first post, i was intentionally being provocative.

I would totally agree with stricter driving tests/retests/additional training (and you get a thumb up for that) but I'd welcome anything to remove 'bad drivers' from the road, both the reckless and the muppets that drive 10 or 20 below an already low speed limit.

I doubt this ISA will do anything good.

[tfewster]

Re: Cost added to production to exclude the UK? Really?

> While it's not currently mandated that cars sold in the UK...

My thought was that the countries that use MPH rather than Km/h would just get ignored.

[Ken Hagan]

Re: Cost added to production to exclude the UK? Really?

This is a system that warns, or not, depending on your speed and where you are. It is going to be pretty trivial to arrange to take no action when outside the EU. If you are planning to sell the same design of car world-wide, it is probably something you will have to do anyway.

[Pomgolian]

Cut the grass

As an expat Pom living in NZ, and having just returned from a three week visit back to blighty, I noticed that nobody seems to cut the grass anymore. I lost count of the number of road signs obscured by grass or trees. The Qashqai I was driving had a feature that was supposed to recognise speed limit signs but a lot of the time it failed because they were hidden behind a hedge. Adaptive cruise control worker pretty well though, perhaps too well - it leaves you very little to do and that can be a tad soporific, which brings it's own problems.

[Mishak]

Re: Cut the grass

Yeah, it's shocking. Round here speed limit and warning signs are now starting to vanish - direction signs mostly got overgrown a couple of years ago.

I plan to take my daughter out in the car so we can take GPS tagged photos and submit a bulk complaint to the local highways office.

[Dinanziame]

Re: Cut the grass

The advantage of such a regulation is that it will force some standards on the visibility and readability of speed signs.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: Cut the grass

It's not just signs that get hidden. One junction I use fairly often (acute angle on the left and steep uphill approach) has long vegetation hiding approaching traffic. I'm thinking about paying a visit with my strimmer.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: Cut the grass

You'll probably get ticketed by the council for vandalism!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Cut the grass

Yes, some environmentalist group came up with the idea of "No Mow May", to help conserve endangered wild flowers and insects. The councils adopted it with glee because it saves them money. I don't know whether it actually does help the wild flowers, but the unintended result is that every square inch of open ground is now choked with thick masses of invasive weeds six feet high.

And if you suffer from hayfever then all you can do is stay indoors.

[blackcat]

Re: Cut the grass

And around here on the first working day of June the mowers were out and all those wild flowers and other stuff was gone.

[John Miles]

Re: Cut the grass

A couple of weeks ago it was reported A driver was blinded by grass allowed to grow tall for bees when she hit and killed a passing motorcyclist, an inquest heard.. I'm all for giving wildlife more room, but perhaps we should give a bit more thought how

[Mishak]

Haptic throttle

A decent haptic throttle can be a nice addition. No idea what the current ones are like, but I wrote the software for one about 20 years ago for an automotive OEM's research project.

Car was ~500bhp - you could set the speed limit to (say) 40mph, stop at a red light and nail it when it went green - the throttle would kick back on your foot, catching the speed at exactly 40.

You could also "press through" if you actually wanted/needed to go faster, but the force was strong enough that it was very easy to maintain the set speed in a 20 limit even if there were gradients.

[I am the liquor]

Re: Haptic throttle

Haptic throttle explainer for IT folks:

You know in Excel, when you're dragging the little handle in the corner of a formula cell to extend the formula down the column, and when it gets level with the last populated cell in the preceding column, it stops for a second to give you a chance to let go of the mouse button before you accidentally extend down to row 1048576? It's a bit like that.

[Dr Dan Holdsworth]

I currently drive a Mazda which has an early version of this system installed. It has a GPS-enabled map with speed limits, but also a camera which if it sees a speed limit sign will override the GPS map version. This function cannot be easily turned off (although the translation of what the car thinks is the limit to what the limiter function is set to CAN be made manual).

Thus driving past Gisburn Livestock Auction, the car will generally indicate that the speed limit is 5 MPH, having seen the internal speed limit sing inside the auction mart's carpark. It towns generally, the system very often sees 20 MPH signs on side roads and sets the local limit to this instead of what the actual road limit is. If the EU system is this daft, it will be widely ignored.

This sort of thing could also be gamed very easily: deploy a GPS jammer and a large sign denoting the speed limit as 10 MPH. A percentage of new cars will then try to conform to this new limit, which on a busy motorway would be carnage indeed.

[Boothy]

I've got a ~18 month old VW, same system, knows the speed limit even when signs are obscured (which atm a lot are in the UK due to councils not cutting the vegetation back). So I'm assuming it using GPS here, as it still changes the recognised speed in the car, even with no visible signage.

The issue is when there is signage, as the car basically picks it up from anywhere, car parks at the side of the road, side streets, works traffic in road works, private access land adjacent to the public road etc etc.

So I regularly get told it's 60, when it's actually 30 (side streets that are national speed limit), or 20 when it's 50 (motorway roadworks), 10 in a 40 (private access road running parallel to the main road) etc etc.

Thankfully you can turn the audio notifications and haptic off (and it remembers it for the next drive)!

[Phil O'Sophical]

I frequently use a local road which has a 60MPH limit, but for some reason the VW GPS thinks that about 200m of it, on a straight clear road with no other roads beside, over, or under, is limited to 40. As I enter that bit the car beeps frantically, and given the traffic levels I'd run the risk of being rear-ended if it actually slowed the car down quickly.

[alain williams]

Is a map subscription mandated ?

We were told that one of the ways that it works is GPS & digital maps. Speed limits change, so if I buy a car like this will I be forced to subscribe to a map updating service ?

[I am the liquor]

Re: Is a map subscription mandated ?

I expect the car manufacturer will happily send the latest maps down to your car, at the same time as they're siphoning off all the data about where you've been, what radio stations you listened to, what seat warmer setting you prefer, etc.

[Ghoule211]

Re: Is a map subscription mandated ?

You'd think but my 2020 BMW with lifetime maps and over the air updates is sat waiting for its 2023 undate, but BMW want £600 for the update even though the subscription is paid for....

[Pink Duck]

Speed guarantors needed more

We’ve all been there, stuck behind the solid 43 mph-ers or the amazingly inconsistent throttle control drivers totally oblivious to signage.

In the former case something slowing them to 30 mph in the villages would be great. In the latter something to keep their speed stably correct would be great, until they want to turn I guess…

[Big_Boomer]

Not ready

I can't wait for 100% Self-Driving cars, but these half-arsed measures that are just adding extra problems on our roads are mostly crap. The chance of me buying a new car has just decreased dramatically because of this new measure. I am quite happy to have the car drive me, but if I am driving the car it needs to do what I tell it to do when I tell it to do it. Some things like ABS I have no problems with as they only interfere in emergencies and are almost always a benefit. I foresee an increase in used car prices once people realise just how intrusive these things are.

I recently rented an MG HS and the amount of nagware is astounding. Too fast "NAG" (65 in a 70 limit), too close "NAG" when a car pulls into the 3 second gap between me and the car in front, it resists lane changes when moving back to the left lane after overtaking UNLESS you indicate (which is NOT required), pulls at the steering wheel when it detects a white line in an abnormal place (roadworks, complex junctions, etc.). I eventually managed to figure out how to switch all of those off, but when I next started the car everything was reset to on.

[Boothy]

Re: Not ready

The lane assist is really annoying for me too. From what I understand, the inability to switch off permanently is a requirement for NCAP (assuming you're in the UK/EU etc), you can turn of temp, but it has to be back on next start, otherwise they loose a star in their NCAP rating.

I've got a VW (~18 months old), the lane assist is basically suicidal. A few things it's done for me:

Note, I'm in the UK, so on the left.

1. On right hand bends in the road, it regularly tries to steer me over the centre line, into the oncoming traffic.

2. It regularly tries to steer me away from the left (curb side), on straight roads, even through I'm already at a proper distance from the curb, and any further over would push me too close to the centre line.

3. As you mention above, trying to stop me from changing lanes to the left, after for example completing an overtake, unless I indicate, even though this is not a requirement in the UK.

4. This is a longer one, but it always without fail happens in this same spot every single time!

Leaving the M62 West bound, at the M606 junction, the left lane is a dedicated slip road for a short while, so runs parallel to the motorway before starting to head off to the left. At this point, the car will insist on going straight on, rather than following the lane I'm in, which is now moving to the left pulling away from the motorway, it is basically trying to carry on down the M62, even though it's a the hard shoulder ahead of me!

The side lane markings to the left are peeling away to the left at this point, moving away from the motorway, with the markings to the right being the line between the slip road and the now new first lane of the M62. My only thought here is the car is for some reason not looking at the correct road markings, i.e. it's trying to follow the line to the right, which is the dotted line between the main road and slip road, rather than follow the line to the left, which indicates the left side of the actual lane.

Be curious to know if anyone out there has similar issues?

One thought I had, is that many cars are designed, built and tested in right hand drive countries, so perhaps the software favours right driving over left driving in some brands?

[blackcat]

Re: Not ready

There was a BIG tesla crash a few years ago in the US where multiple and ongoing roadworks had left a proper mess of old lane markings, joint repairs and other lines on the road and the tesla duly followed the wrong one and went head on into the end of the barrier where the road diverged. And due to a previous impact the impact attenuator was no longer functional and it split the car in half, killing the occupant and ripping the battery apart resulting in a big fire.

[Alex Stuart]

Re: Not ready

Agree completely. I've always turned this crap off in rental cars when it inevitably starts doing stupid stuff like wobbling the steering wheel because it doesn't understand junctions/sliproads.

Happy with my mostly-analog BMW that only has ABS, which I appreciate is good tech though only ever kicked in when I forced it to see how it worked. No touchscreens, no interference, proper handbrake, no other solutions for problems that don't exist like keyless entry etc.

Auto-brake is as far as I'd go as long as I could trust it to work even better than my own eyesight and reaction time - from reading comments about it, it seems like it's not there yet.

[GlenP]

Having driven in Wales over Easter I found the manual speed limiter very useful (it's very easy to accelerate to beyond 20mph without realising).

However, TomTom routinely reported 20mph limits when they were, in fact, 30mph (I'm guessing they'd updated all 30s to 20), and the sign recognition on the car is easily fooled by signs on side roads and really doesn't like variable speed limit signs (it read 200 on one occasion).

[Barry Rueger]

Ah, but France

France seems to have solved this issue (except for BMW drivers of course.) People for the most part drive at or near the legal limit on highways. Big, monumental speed cameras remind you why this is a good idea.

In towns though they use a decidedly non-digital toolbox: 30 kmh limits, lots of roundabouts, and LOTS of speed bumps.

Somehow the French managed the seemingly impossible feat of deciding "in towns, cars need be slowed down down to protect the people walking or biking."

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: Ah, but France

And yet France has a road fatality rate nearly twice that of the UK (45 per million, compared to 25 in the UK).

Might, in part, be because being caught drink-driving will only get you points for a first offence (unless you're way over the limit and/or cause an accident), so a lot of people think it's not really serious.

[Wally Dug]

Wrong GNSS Details

There is a dual carriageway in the centre of my town that is street lit - so 30 mph. My GNSS system shows this as 30 mph. Then there is a break in the central reservation - no change in speed limits at all - and my GNSS system shows 50 mph. At the next break in the central reservation, the GNSS system goes back to 30 mph and then it resumes as a two-way street lit carriageway, so still 30 mph. How many other inaccuracies are prevalent in these systems?

And if it was the other way - a higher speed limit suddenly becoming a slower speed limit - and the haptic feedback is enabled, who would be liable for any resulting accidents/claims due to sudden deceleration?

In general, a speed limiter is a good thing - one simply has to read news reports about the impact caused by people who speed (for example https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxe2j8x222go where the driver drove at more than 140 mph) - but like all technology if it relies on something to make it function then that something has to be accurate and trustworthy.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, nah.

I’ll stick with my 2012 dinosaur.

No beeps, bongs, voices, dings, bleeps, blurts, whistles, klaxons, reminders, did I mention dings?

The future sure looks rosy, not.

[DoctorPaul]

Re: Yeah, nah.

I'll see your 2012 dinosaur and raise you my 1989 BMW which I have just treated to a serious engine rebuild. It's got all I need - fuel injection, electric windows, option for ABS and CC.

I got my licence in the 1960s and never in my life have I bought a new car, so I reckon that this petrol-head has a lower carbon footprint than many :-)

[0laf]

Pointless

The majority of cars from the last 10yr have the option to turn on a limter as part of the cruise control and/or a audible warning set at a speed the driver has selected.

I quite like the limiter for average speed camera areas and the excess speed bong is reasonable to remind if my speeds have crept up.

This mandated irritation adds nothing and those who choose to ignore speed limits will ignore limiter bongs as well.

[sanwin]

Changing Country - what then?

So here am I driving in the UK with a car reading road signs on the LHS in MPH. So I decide to take a trip to France/Spain/etc. I'm now driving on the 'wrong' side of the road with the car looking in the wrong place for speed signs which are now in KPH. So I hit a 40kph limit and my car does 40mph - now what?

[graeme leggett]

Re: Changing Country - what then?

The software recognises when you go the "wrong way" round the first roundabout on the E402 in Calais and switches to km/h

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: Changing Country - what then?

Not all of them. My recent VW-group car requires me to dig through the menu options and select "Right-hand traffic" in order to get the lights to dip appropriately, and I also have to manually change the "units" setting from MPH to km/h.

[Alan Edwards]

Re: Changing Country - what then?

GPS knows where it is. I was watching a video on YouTube (I think it was The Mac Master's Taycan) and it detected that it was in France coming off the ferry and automatically reconfigured the lights and instruments.

As far as I know the cameras just assume any speed sign that is facing you applies to you.

[QuiteEvilGraham]

Re: Changing Country - what then?

Funny you should mention that.

I have some friends in France who lived and worked for some years in the UK. One half of the partnership is a major anglophile who likes to get back over as often as she can, so I've caught up with them in both France and the UK since they moved.

Entertainingly, the last time I saw them back in the South-East, they had a car with maps only for France. The display in the UK consisted of the car despondently facing the Channel with the waves lapping gently in front.

Then again, for a few years I had a big second hand BMW 3 ltr diesel auto. When I bought it, the battery had run down so needed to be jump started at first and the previous settings for everything must have been reset, including the satnav settings. The first country it picked as a destination when being re-configured was, somewhat astonishingly, Poland. I can only conclude that someone at BMW has a rather dark sense of humour.

These days, I don't need something that can eat motorways, so I have a wee Ford Fiesta with the 999cc 3 pot turbo. Very frugal, but the gearing makes it almost impossible to keep to 30mph in 4th. Fortunately it just flashes the speed limit in the dash but is otherwise not a distraction. I'm all for useful driver aids but anything that requires you to take your eyes of the road ahead is going to lead to perverse incentives.

[graeme leggett]

Re: Changing Country - what then?

"but the gearing makes it almost impossible to keep to 30mph in 4th"

I know a Dacia a bit like that, 40 mph seems to be too high for 4th gear and too low for 5th. I wonder if it's because it was designed for Europe where they don't have a speed limit around 40mph

[Number6]

Re: Changing Country - what then?

As far as I know the cameras just assume any speed sign that is facing you applies to you.

I foresee much fun with this one. If you live in a village and your house number is appropriately low, make yourself a sign with that number in a red circle and display it in your front garden to get all the cars to slow down.

[Anonymous Coward]

Speed Sign T-Shirts

Already available on Amazon and other t-shirt sellers. This is going to be fun.

[Alan Edwards]

BMW/Amazon Prime pricing model?

Who'll be the first manufacturer to make it a limiter by default, and charge £10 a month to add an override function?

[MJI]

Lane assist

I neighbour has it on a new car.

It does weird things when changing lane.

They do not like it.

[Jimmy2Cows]

Re: Lane assist

These things tend to make lane keeping decisions based on the indicators. So if your neighbour steers even a fraction of a second before indicating, or doesn't indicate at all, then it will do some "weird" things.

It's the vehicular equivalent of Apple's "You're holding it wrong". Not driving how they say you should drive.

Of course everyone should check if it's safe, indicate, check again, then change lane. But since most people don't do that (i.e. start changing lane then indicate), lane assist will do things they aren't expecting.

[imanidiot]

Re: Lane assist

I honestly don't know anyone that actually likes lane-assist.

[cluck]

Just off the top of my head :

Incorrect map data - a road I take from my house to the nearest town keeps getting edited down, on one of the mapping sites that multiple car manufacturers use, to a 30mph limit when it is a NSL road (ie, nominally 60mph). I keep changing it back to the correct setting, but it gets reset within a month or so.

Errant speed limit signs - there is a lone 30mph sign on a side-road on the way home from the local town, which every modern 'sign-recognition equipped' car I've been in has read as the de-facto limit for the main road I'm on, which is a NSL road. The sign has been there for at least a decade but the council hasn't removed it despite multiple requests over the years (there is no 30mph limit on the entire stretch of road it stands at the head of). There is also a road that heads off from the main road, but is straight-ahead as you look at it, and this has prominent 40mph signs. Yep, all the cars pick that up and decide the NSL road is now a 40mph limit, overriding the map data that thinks it's a 30 or a 60, depending on which mapping data they are using. Both of these are within a mile of where I live.

A friend's '22-plate' VW keeps deciding that the motorway is a 100mph limit at random. It has been suggested, though not proven yet, that the camera sign recognition on the car is reading the speed stickers on the back of lorries and not realising that '100' on a foreign lorry isn't the speed limit.

GPS misidentifying your position and deciding you are driving in an adjacent industrial estate that has a 5mph limit, whilst you are in a 30mph limit

As with the other 'driver assistance' tools, like lane-keep assist et al, I'm sure that if you are driving predominantly on motorways or well-maintained wide carriageways, then the system probably works, but in the real world where signs have not been placed with this wonderful technological future in mind, it simply isn't fit for purpose. And good luck getting our bankrupt councils to worry about removing, replacing or changing orientation of all the road signs in the country.

[MachDiamond]

"Incorrect map data - a road I take from my house to the nearest town keeps getting edited down, on one of the mapping sites that multiple car manufacturers use, to a 30mph limit when it is a NSL road (ie, nominally 60mph). I keep changing it back to the correct setting, but it gets reset within a month or so."

My SatNav (TomTom) has issues around my home where it doesn't seem to have data and defaults to 25mph when the actual posted limit is 45mph. While I like having a prompt that lets me know what the limit might be on a highway and when I'm going a bit faster than that, the vast majority of the time I'm going on long experience and the signs. There's a lot of highway construction on a route I often have to take (only 4 years to rebuild 15 miles of road) so the SatNav is very wrong since the limit is greatly reduced through the work zone. Never mind that at one place there's a sign reading 70mph and 50ft further along is one that reads 55mph. They can't even remove or cover the 70pmh sign which is a 10-15 minute job for a noob.

[Anonymous Coward]

What happens if you cover the cameras? Must use GPS.

[michaelaubert]

No new cars in the EU then

Government-mandated a GPS and SIM means the objects for sale won't be cars anymore. We need a new word.

This has to be about the insurance lobby, right?

It ensures total behavior tracking becomes possible on all vehicles over time.

Rental companies are going to make more money from the segment of the population that will never buy such a vehicle.

But then again, lots of people don't even try to use adblockers...