Put the Hammer Down
Friday, September 30, 2011 at 10:15AM When ever I drove my VW Golf R32 along the UK motorway network a few years back, before I traded it in for a Toyota Prius, I was always amazed at how many cars would be overtaking me. I wasn’t racing, I was just cruising along at a steady 90-95 miles an hour.
Again and again, Jags, Porsches, Range Rovers, BMWs, Mercedes and Bentley’s would fly past, without question doing well over 100 miles an hour.
I will remind you this was not on an autobahn, this was on the M40 near Stokenchurch.
The speed limit in the UK was then, and is now, 70. There are some people who drive at 70 or less, trucks, coaches and very, very few cars.
White vans, I’d say the average is 85, most passenger cars about the same, a few cars hammering along over the ton. Of course it’s illegal, if you get caught the penalties are severe but a huge proportion of British drivers regularly flout this particular law. I was one of them, if I’m pointing fingers, one of those fingers is pointing at myself.
Another observation I think is very relevant to this proposal is journey time. I had a weekly drive back in 2005 of 120 odd miles from my house to the Scrapheap Challenge location. One week I drove there in my re-chipped, 4 wheel drive VW R32, maxing the speed at every opportunity. I knew where the speed cameras were, I knew where police patrols were likely to be. I dove that car for a year and never got a speeding ticket, but I drove like a criminal, always terrified I was going to be caught.
Then I did the same journey in the Prius, driving in my socks to get max mpg. Never breaking the speed limit, often well under the speed limit. The journey took me 12 minutes longer. That’s all. Not an hour, as I was expecting, 12 pathetic, short minutes.
The R32 would get at best 20 mpg. The 2nd generation Prius got over 70.
And now, our current Transport Secretary, the clearly brilliant and in no way connected with the oil industry and no relation of Richard, Philip Hammond has said he wants to raise the speed limit to 80.
So if with a speed limit of 70, the average speed is let’s say 75-80, then with a speed limit of 80, it’s going to be nearer 85-90.
I’m not going to consider the risk factors, I think our motorways are generally very safe, statistically much safer than A roads and way safer than the charming wiggly lanes near where I live which are lethal.
I am going to consider the efficiency factors though.
When you see an advert for a car and it says ’48.3 mpg combined cycle,’ that’s a test done on a rolling road. Yes, those big steel rollers under the wheels, in a building. It’s a bit of a joke, but it’s a level playing field joke as all cars do the same test.
The thing the love it/hate it Prius does is give a very accurate picture of your fuel consumption. I’ve driven them long enough now to know that the figures appearing on the screen and the actual use of fuel are very close.
If I drive along the M40 in the Prius at 65 mph max, I will get over 78 mpg. My all time record, 112 miles on the M5 to Cornwall to visit Dick (the tash) Stawbridge was 82.4 mpg. The M5 was really busy and slow, it was summer, nightmare journey but brilliant mpg.
If I drive at 70, the Prius will get about 68 mpg. 10 mpg less than 5 miles an hour slower. If I drive at 80 in the Prius, it drops down to about 58. If I really thrash it, touching 90, you can get it down to the high 40’s. And this is in a car whose very existence, whose whole conceptual design and technology is focussed on minimizing fuel use.
The simple fact is, the faster you go, the more the car has to push against the air, and the more fuel you burn. It’s not, as I hate saying, ‘rocket science.’
I know I’m going to hear from a load of blokes who drive big diesel Beemers and Mercs who will claim that because they’ve got a massive engine they can cruise at 90 and still get 46 mpg or some such nonsense.
I will not be impressed until cars are getting well over 100 mpg, anything below that is an embarrassment, anything below 60 is an affront to decent citizens, and anything below 40 mpg should be a public order offense.
However, even if you have a plug in hybrid Volvo V60, a car I recently drove in Sweden that over a month could easily achieve an average of 140 mpg, get in that and hammer it down a freeway at 85 or 90 miles an hour and it’s going to drink diesel like it’s going out of style. Which, by the way, it is.
A 55 mph speed limit, like they have in most of the USA, brought in during the 70’s ‘oil crisis,’ now that would be a radical and challenging proposal. You’d still get there, it would take you a few minutes longer, leave a little earlier, listen to an audiobook while you drive, broaden your mind.
An audiobook suggestion, try ‘The Man in the Rubber Mask’ written and read by Robert Llewellyn. Available soon on audible.co.uk.
Reader Comments (33)
As for fuel use at higher speeds, that's only one side of the equation. I know my car does about 40mpg at 70, and as a pure guess I would assume something like say 30mpg or a tad lower at 80mph. Thing is, yes it uses more fuel but as someone who drives about 45,000 miles a year, I value my time at more than the cost of the increased fuel use. For example, yesterday I drove from Cheltenham to Glasgow and back. Doing it at 85 versus 70 meant I was tucked up in bed when I would otherwise still have been somewhere north of Birmingham - that's worth real money and more than the costs of the increased fuel. Those small time savings make a difference over a year.
Interesting post, I'm interested in fuel efficiency and saving money myself but I'm not sure I agree on moving the speed limit the other way. As I was reminded on my motorcycle test, the speed limit is a limit, not a target. I feel it removes the choice, people choose to get to their destination a little quicker and spend more on fuel and such doing so. People choose what temperature to heat their houses to, but from an environmental moral that too should be controlled.
High fuel prices make that choice even more stark at the moment, but it is still a choice. I recently drove over in Germany and it was a long trip over a short time in a small (1.4) car and I've no doubt the triple figure stretches were the most fuel inefficient of its life but that was a choice and I much preferred the lack of guilty conscience that I might at any point hit the surcharge jackpot (when the men in bright cars turn their blue lights on) and increase the cost of my journey further.
Mandating that everyone should drive 55 will no doubt earn the government millions in speeding fines as peoples perceived "normal" speed changes and will take some of it away from oil companies but at what price freedom? be that of choice, speech or whatever else.
Several years ago I went from having a mildy sporty (though also rather knackered) MG Montego to buying a old Beetle. I needed something different because the Montego was on it's last legs, and I decided then was the time to get a Beetle as I'd wanted one for ages, and knew if I got anything quicker than the Montego, I'd never be able to go back to something as slow as the VW was going to be.
After I'd had the Beetle a while and got used to driving more slowly than I had before, I noticed something. Around town, having a slow car made no different (I lived in a congested place.) When I'd head up to A roads to visit family, I'd do a ten mile or so trip and realised I often ended up only a few car lengths away from people who'd overtaken me as soon as we'd merged on to the fast road. They'd spent most of their time in the fast lane, I'd stuck to the slow one.
I've mentioned this to friends who have seriously fast cars and they never believe me. You have to not only be able to break the speed limit by a very long way for it to make much difference to shortish journeys, you also need the opportunity to do it for the whole journey. But really, on Britain's current roads that's generally impossible, as there's always someone on the same bit of road as you going more slowly.
These days, I tend to find twisty, more technical roads much more fun than outright speed, which I tend to find a bit dull.
I was thinking exactly the same on my way down the M1 today. I have a Nissan Cube which is the least aerodynamic car you could find, so I tend to stick on cruise control and sit at 70-75. I find that a good balance between speed and MPG. I feel so slow though, especially when I am over taken by smaller, less powerful cars which must be drinking petrol like a thirsty sailor.
I have been to Japan and was impressed by the roads there. 80 is the general limit and that's km/h (some roads are 100). That seemed a much more sensible and civilised speed.
You're right to, driving fast saves very little time overall. If you stop and think about it, do you really want to get to work earlier to? Relax in your car, listen to some music, slow down and enjoy the scenery and then enjoy not filling up your tank so much...
@ Adam Jackson
interesting, if i do the maths there:
45000 per year / ( 5 days * 45 weeks ) [ assuming you work an optimistic 45 weeks / 5 day week ]
gives us: 225 days' driving into 45000 = 200 miles per day. [ at an optimistically high average ]
so, 200 miles per day @ 85 mph = 2.3 hours driving per day
and, 200 miles per day @ 70 mph = 2.8 hours driving per day...
net saving in your busy life = half an hour per day, and that's a pessimistic estimate.
[ i admit in your "extreme" example, you'd have only been a little over 45 minutes later ]
if your life is so busy that 30-50 minutes means that you must spend more carbon into the atmosphere (since you care not about the fuel cost to you, the consumer) ... then perhaps you need to slow down your life as well as your car :)
Coming at it from the safety angle...
Here in Wales we have quite a few stretches of two-lane motorway, so when a lorry decides to overtake another lorry on a hill at short notice, you have to rapidly loose speed (as there is no lane 3 to go into).
A speed limit of 70 mph gives you a closing speed with a lorry limited to 56 mph of 6 metres a second, which is bad enough, a limit of 80 would give you a closing speed of 11 metres a second, which is darn right scary.
Another issue is of course aquaplaning in wet conditions, where by the faster you go, the more the water the wheels have to clear. An increase in speed is directly linked to an increase in the chance of aquaplaning.
Now some driving organisations say that it should be up to the driver to choose the appropriate speed for the conditions. To that I say that not every driver is a good judge of their abilities and that even a good driver has their off days - one only needs to watch a couple of F1 races to see that.
the speed limit was introduced as an experiment in safety, and there's little to no evidence to suggest that motorway limits do anything to aid that. by increasing it, you're basically only recognising the speeds that most people drive at - perfectly safely - on a day-to-day basis, and helping drivers relax. after all, good drivers don't drive to speed limits: they drive to suit the conditions. bad drivers are either driving too quickly *or* too slowly, and excessive speed is only a factor in a minute fraction of accidents.
yes, fuel consumption rates are an issue, but - and here's the thing - i think that's a *good* thing. if it's legal to drive more quickly, more people will drive more quickly. seems fairly obvious. the side effect is that more people will become aware of the increased costs due to increased fuel consumption. so, their options become drive slower to reduce costs, or get a car with a better mpg. in other worse, it will make more people more aware of the costs involved. end of the day, most people don't care about 'green' issues. what they will care about is the cost to themselves. the other thing is that if the speed limit does cause higher fuel consumption rates, it'll run out quicker. and that's great: more pressure to get alternatives up to scratch to become viable alternatives.
at the end of the day, very few people can afford to buy that lovely-sounding 140 mpg volvo, or an electric vehicle, or even a hybrid. until that sort of vehicle is available at the sub £10k mark *and* it meets the range criteria that most people have for a daily work commute and longer motorway miles, we're stuck with the current set-up. and if increasing the speed limit to the sort of speeds that the average motorist already drives at helps to make the roads even slightly more pleasant to drive on, then i'm all for it.
@Adam Jackson
" I value my time at more than the cost of the increased fuel use. "
*sigh*
I knew I shouldn't have read these comments.
Adam, I assume you're a doctor, a firefighter, mountain rescue or fulfil some other role vital to life, limb and western ciivilisation? Because if you weren't, that statement might look a little misguided in light of rapidly diminishing stocks of oil and gas, mightn't it?
Still, as long as your time is valuable...perhaps we could sell some of it to the Saudis in exchange for some more oil?
I made an interesting observation when I was a road warrior some 10 or so years ago.
When I drove on the M40 at around 85mph I was constantly being overtaken; it felt like I was the slowest car on the road.
When I drove on the M1 at 80mph I was overtaking most other traffic.
The M4 averaged at about 85mph for cars but there was a wide range of speeds.
I've never been able to come up with a theory of why this is but, for some reason, the M40 is a faster motorway than the M1.
Here's an idea... (and I know it wont happen and not being entirely serious)
Increase the limit to 80 but only for cars that can do that at say > 50mpg - ie hybrids/plugins/etc.
But Mr Rob - that argument can be extended to anything really and when it does it gets nonsensical. Is it really worth using a diminishing stock of oil and pumping out more CO2 just to go visit my parents some 180 miles away? Or really worth getting in the car to drive down to the Chelt Science Festival to see a certain ex-Red Dwarf actor talk about electric cars and to have a go in an electric mini, or pop down to the shops, or think 'nice weekend, think I'll go down to the coast with the dogs', etc. etc.
In the cold light of day the answer is always going to be no, it's never worth it, then the reality of life intervenes.
@yngling
actually, that half-hour a day is unbearably precious to me. that half hour a day could easily be the difference between putting my baby daughter to bed at night and not seeing her at all. that half an hour could easily be family dinners vs eating on my own. that time could be spent reading a book, talking to friends, enjoying a nice whisky, playing a game, playing my guitar, catching some sun in the garden, going out for a walk...
if half an hour being taken away from you wouldn't be missed, then perhaps you should evaluate why your life is so empty ;)
The speed limit is 65mph on Intertstate 580 as the very nice Californian Highway Patrolman reminded me when he pulled me over for doing 80mph. (I think fitting my driving licence number on his forms and the prospect of chasing some bloody foreigner put him off.)
@Adam Jackson
45000 at 70 takes about 643 hours, at 80 takes 563, that's a saving of approximately 80 hours pa, 1.5 hours p/w. Assuming 5 working days per week, 20 days holiday per year, giving 240 working days per year, that's a saving of 20 minutes per working day.
45000 at 40 mpg uses 1125 gallons = 5114 litres => £6746
45000 at 30 mpg uses 1500 gallons = 6819 litres => £8994
1 g = approx 4.54 litres
Best pence per litre where I live, 131.9
So It's costing you at least £2249 p/a extra *just in fuel*.
Saving 20 minutes per working day is costing you £9.36 per working day.
How long do you have to work to earn £9.36
At minimum wage that's be about 1.5 hours,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_in_the_United_Kingdom has average salary in S/W England (i.e. Cheltenham?) at £20,954. Divide by 52 weeks at 37.5 hours per week, gives £10.74 per hour.
So at an average salary for the region you'd have to work 52 minutes to pay for the saving of twenty minutes of your time, a net time deficit of 32 minutes.
I am self-employed and charge around £700 per day so say 30 mins saving in a day is about £43 by your calculation. Yes, a bit of exrtra fuel is worth it. I take three weeks off a year and do at least five days per week out and about so that 20 minutes per day is very valuable and as someone else said above, means getting to do the smaller things in life which I otherwise wouldn't. Its a balance - I don't go haring about everywhere at 80 (and don't have a Jag, Audi, BMW or any other powerful beast) but when I do big journeys which I do about twice a week, it makes a real difference to drive faster and is worth the cost.
I think people are confusing the distinct ideas of 'price' and 'cost'.
I drive at around 60mph on the UK Motorways. I rarely overtake and arrive at my destination unstressed and calm. I realised ages ago that the constant need to 'go faster' made the journey a horrible, dreaded experience. Always looking in the rear view mirror, finding the gap, getting frustrated when the car in front wasn't going fast enough - it all just stresses you out. I noticed that my (what seemed like) slow, frustrating, traffic jammed journeys usually got me home only a few minutes later than my slick, no-problem, fast journeys, When I saw a car spin right in front of me on the M5 I decided enough was enough and that I would rather get home a tiny bit later than not at all.
Since changing my speed down to 60mph, I have seen just how much fuel I'm saving and I was quite surprised. That's CO2 I'm not releasing. That's UK money staying in the UK economy instead of supporting a potentially unfriendly / unethical regime.
As for increasing the speed limit, I think that would be incredibly hypocritical as the governments CO2 policy would be untenable. How could they argue for us to reduce our CO2 footprint (even supporting renewable energy projects and CO2 reduction initiatives from our taxes - which, incidentally, I do approve of) while sending out a signal like this.
@ blades...
not empty... very full [ i don't generally go to bed before 2:30am with my music and suchlike - up at 6:45am for the bus to my 9-5 day job ] ... however, other than my arrival at work and departure for home, i don't live by a time-and-motion clock, and nor do my family. When my young kids were babies, they wen't to bed when we felt like it... not at a time set by these baby-time-gods.... similarly flexible and relaxed was dinner :)
It's a very strong argument, and not many people argue with the benefits of using less fuel. Spending less, giving less to the government, even less to the greedy oil companies, saving the planet... the list goes on and on. However... and its a big however to me, last week, I saved just over 2 hours per 10 mph over 70. I know, its only 2 hours in a whole week, but they are my 2 hours and your not taking them away from me.
On top of this, and slightly off subject, I think that the police are very sensible with their policy on speed limits. They understand that it is not speed that kills, its people. It's peoples bad driving and yes, sometimes this is because they are driving too fast for the conditions, but by enlarge its because the drivers are not concentrating, not reading the road, being selfish or arrogant. We can all speed up, drive less arrogantly, be more polite and still be safe. As for the fuel, 10 years ago I was very happy with 30mpg, now I'm happy with 50mpg and driving a faster car. It's going in the right direction, and although I'm not advocating a slower speed limit, I need them 2 hours, I am very happy for the likes of Robert pushing the manufacturers to improve their offering. Who knows, maybe we will all be driving at 90mph with zero emissions in the next 10 years.
Just weigh in here as someone who commuted from the west coast of Scotland to the east coast for 3 years by car as the public transport couldn't do it. The speeds here seem much less, I'd regularly sit at 60mph in a long queue of other commuters who realised this journey was just as quick but more efficient at this speed. It actually was rare to get someone screaming past at 80 or 90.
Maybe it's a slower pace if life, I was brought up in the Midlands and in my visits south by car the attitude to driving is noticeable, even my time in Glasgow on the snarled up M8 at rush hour was slightly less pressured than driving in familiar Birmingham.
We have tried to educate drivers about reducing speed to make the roads safer and cleaner, this madness by Tories is another "everyone does it so let's legalise it". It worked for criminals hiding cash in Switzerland so let's apply it on the roads too.