Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Entirely unashamed anti car propaganda, and the more the better.

edcraw said:
Seems to be about 10dB which is pretty significant - just thought it was interesting that they didn’t care about the impact their actions have on others. Very typical of drivers.

What is a good noise rating for tyres? Tyre noise ratings chart explained

At first glance, a tyre's numbering and labelling system look fairly impenetrable, but once explained it starts to make sense.
www.protyre.co.uk www.protyre.co.uk
Click to expand...
They say that, but I've never seen a mainstream tyre that's not in the 69-72 dB range. I'm sure there are some special bottom end crap ones and top end racing ones that are louder, but the vast majority are in that tiny range. By rating, of course. I don't necessarily trust that.
 
edcraw said:
Click to expand...

I usually stay clear of this thread, but am happy to contribute to it this fucking gem by the Telegraph, showcasing the Tories’ weird obsession with their imaginary ‘war on motorists’.


I mean, how do the people behind that report reckon the goods proposed to be delivered by these highly dangerous cargo bikes are currently being delivered? Are they seriously saying 3.5-ton vans are less hazardous to pedestrians than the 0.5-ton cargo bikes that are proposed as an alternative?
 
edcraw said:
Absolutely insane that we allow cars that can do 141mph on our roads. Just crazy that no government has been been prepared to do anything about this!

www.theguardian.com

Man jailed over drunken 141mph crash that killed woman and baby

Darryl Anderson was almost three times over drink-driving limit when he crashed, killing Zackary Blades and his aunt, Karlene Warner
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
About that: https://www.autoweek.com/news/a61532276/mandatory-speed-limiters-europe-cars/
(NB: I have this in my car and it's fantastically unreliable - the tech is not actually there to enforce it, unfortunately)

Though I think the issue here is more the "triple the drink driving limit" than the raw speed. That fucker was going to kill someone anyhow, speed just made it worse.
 
Chz said:
About that: https://www.autoweek.com/news/a61532276/mandatory-speed-limiters-europe-cars/
(NB: I have this in my car and it's fantastically unreliable - the tech is not actually there to enforce it, unfortunately)

Though I think the issue here is more the "triple the drink driving limit" than the raw speed. That fucker was going to kill someone anyhow, speed just made it worse.
Click to expand...
No - the issue is very much a car shouldn’t be able to do 141mph on our roads as there’s absolutely no need and it’s incredible dangerous.

It’s not even about limiters - it’s about power. Why should such a car be allowed?

Of course it’s this cunt’s fault but unfortunately there are always going to be people like that so blame also falls on those that allow this to happen - we just shouldn’t allow people to have extremely fast cars on public roads in the same way we don’t allow handguns.

Sick of people just shrugging at these incidents saying “huh - what you gonna do eh?” 🤷
 
edcraw said:
No - the issue is very much a car shouldn’t be able to do 141mph on our roads as there’s absolutely no need and it’s incredible dangerous.

It’s not even about limiters - it’s about power. Why should such a car be allowed?

Of course it’s this cunt’s fault but unfortunately there are always going to be people like that so blame also falls on those that allow this to happen - we just shouldn’t allow people to have extremely fast cars on public roads in the same way we don’t allow handguns.

Sick of people just shrugging at these incidents saying “huh - what you gonna do eh?” 🤷
Click to expand...

There are always going to be people who eat too much, so let's make cakes illegal. Nobody actually needs cakes. Imagine how many lives you'd save if cakes, crisps, pizzas, etc. were banned. Nobody needs these things.
 
edcraw said:
It’s not even about limiters - it’s about power. Why should such a car be allowed?
Click to expand...
A reasonably mediocre car that can accelerate in good time to motorway speeds (say more than 10 seconds to 60) is going to be capable of doing a minimum of 110mph in top gear. It's not strictly power, per se. It's about capping top speed.
 
Chz said:
A reasonably mediocre car that can accelerate in good time to motorway speeds (say more than 10 seconds to 60) is going to be capable of doing a minimum of 110mph in top gear. It's not strictly power, per se. It's about capping top speed.
Click to expand...
Okay
 
Saul Goodman said:
There are always going to be people who eat too much, so let's make cakes illegal. Nobody actually needs cakes. Imagine how many lives you'd save if cakes, crisps, pizzas, etc. were banned. Nobody needs these things.
Click to expand...
You’re definitely onto something. The sugar tax with drinks has been high effective and should be replicated with food.

www.theguardian.com

Children’s daily sugar consumption halved just a year after tax, study finds

Experts say success shows expansion of tax to cover other foods and drinks is a ‘no brainer’
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
Chz said:
A reasonably mediocre car that can accelerate in good time to motorway speeds (say more than 10 seconds to 60) is going to be capable of doing a minimum of 110mph in top gear. It's not strictly power, per se. It's about capping top speed.
Click to expand...
Make "reasonably mediocre" cars less powerful then.
 
teuchter said:
Make "reasonably mediocre" cars less powerful then.
Click to expand...
It's an interesting topic actually, more nuanced than you might think. It wouldn't be a starter with ICE cars, because once you get below 12secs or so to 60, it becomes very onerous for the driver to merge into faster traffic. (petrolheads would call 12secs "dead slow", I think it's the slowest thing that's not actively annoying and you're already looking at downshifting twice for a moderate hill at that point) But EVs are a different story. Peak power can be limited, and that's good for efficiency, but electric motors are insanely torquey compared to ICEs. So it's possible to produce a car that's power limited in peak speed and acceleration, but still has plenty of oomph to merge with motorway traffic. Something that isn't really possible with their dino-burning cousins.
 
Saul Goodman said:
There are always going to be people who eat too much, so let's make cakes illegal. Nobody actually needs cakes. Imagine how many lives you'd save if cakes, crisps, pizzas, etc. were banned. Nobody needs these things.
Click to expand...
You can pretty much only kill yourself with cake and crisps.
 
Chz said:
It's an interesting topic actually, more nuanced than you might think. It wouldn't be a starter with ICE cars, because once you get below 12secs or so to 60, it becomes very onerous for the driver to merge into faster traffic. (petrolheads would call 12secs "dead slow", I think it's the slowest thing that's not actively annoying and you're already looking at downshifting twice for a moderate hill at that point) But EVs are a different story. Peak power can be limited, and that's good for efficiency, but electric motors are insanely torquey compared to ICEs. So it's possible to produce a car that's power limited in peak speed and acceleration, but still has plenty of oomph to merge with motorway traffic. Something that isn't really possible with their dino-burning cousins.
Click to expand...
The thing is that even if we accept, say, 110mph as a "reasonable" top speed, the difference between that and a top speed of 140mph is not at all trivial, because it's not like the car just needs to be 30% more powerful, it needs to be in the order of twice as powerful.

1720643992216.png


The real reason for these powerful cars is of course nothing to do with reasonableness, it's all to do with making them fun to drive for the driver, and that's exactly the thing that we should be never ever be optimising for, for anything that is allowed on the public road.
 
teuchter said:
The thing is that even if we accept, say, 110mph as a "reasonable" top speed, the difference between that and a top speed of 140mph is not at all trivial, because it's not like the car just needs to be 30% more powerful, it needs to be in the order of twice as powerful.

View attachment 432881


The real reason for these powerful cars is of course nothing to do with reasonableness, it's all to do with making them fun to drive for the driver, and that's exactly the thing that we should be never ever be optimising for, for anything that is allowed on the public road.
Click to expand...
110 isn't reasonable though. It's just a side effect of needing enough power to get up hills and merge with faster traffic, and gearing to cruise economically at Motorway speeds. Speed limiters are a fab idea, but at the moment because they're imperfect they have to allow them to be overridden. I have a system in my car (cameras+gps) and there's little point paying attention to it given how often it's wrong. Especially with random, instead of blanket, 20mph zones being rolled out all over the place.

With EVs, some wankers are always going to find a way to unlock any restrictions. Even a fairly weak electric motor can go rather fast indeed if you unlock the system to dump as much power as the things will bear (and more). You don't see it now because boy racers don't buy Leafs and Zoes and Teslas already have a "ludicrous speed" (oh ha ha, we know we're being irresponsible) setting. Even these days, because turbos are most manufacturers' solution to test (if not real) fuel economy, the cops regularly pull over people in fairly standard cars with a turbo tweak and remap for a few hundred quid that makes them silly fast. I see power restrictions like the idea of bicycle registrations - it costs money to set up, won't stop anyone who's an asshole already, and is near unenforceable. And really, really unpopular. (ignoring practicalities like having to dream up a whole set of power classes around weight and aerodynamics so that vans can go uphill without letting Hyundai i10s scream on the same power)

Best idea is to perfect the speed limiter. It's a lot easier to nail the cheaters when 99% of people are doing the limit and it almost works now.
 
Chz said:
110 isn't reasonable though. It's just a side effect of needing enough power to get up hills and merge with faster traffic, and gearing to cruise economically at Motorway speeds
Click to expand...
I meant reasonable in the sense of being a side effect of a "reasonable" requirement.

The point being about 140 vs 110mph top speeds.
 
teuchter said:
I meant reasonable in the sense of being a side effect of a "reasonable" requirement.

The point being about 140 vs 110mph top speeds.
Click to expand...
I'm just having a moment here remembering my long departed father bringing back my car after borrowing it and noting that it "runs out of puff" just before 130mph. I was furious. But it's funny now, 25 years later. (it was a BMW 6-series, so at least the car was safe at speed so long as no one else was around it)

But yeah, top speed should be 85 and that's only because some countries still have a 130km/h limit. Germans would have to get used to it, but my experience was that 80 was a perfectly sane speed on the autobahn because gas is expensive and most people won't go faster.
 
Elpenor said:
If people want to travel 100mph somewhere they should take the train
Click to expand...
I've done track days in fast cars and never got close to 100. Most amateur tracks don't have enough of a straight for anything that's not proper exotic to hit that speed. The road legal track car can still be a thing with limiters.
 
Chz said:
About that: https://www.autoweek.com/news/a61532276/mandatory-speed-limiters-europe-cars/
(NB: I have this in my car and it's fantastically unreliable - the tech is not actually there to enforce it, unfortunately)

Though I think the issue here is more the "triple the drink driving limit" than the raw speed. That fucker was going to kill someone anyhow, speed just made it worse.
Click to expand...
In the absence of banning cars, we should mandate that private drivers can go no more than 4mph to put them on a par with walking.
 
Seems that drivers do so many more 3 point turns than they used to - anyone else noticed this? Just seems to highlight the inherent selfishness of most of them tbh.
 
edcraw said:
Seems that drivers do so many more 3 point turns than they used to - anyone else noticed this? Just seems to highlight the inherent selfishness of most of them tbh.
Click to expand...

I like it when they just get fed up of the traffic and spend ten minutes making more traffic and reversing on themselves to get out of it while the car behind fumes



Or when they get fed up of a queue at a junction to join traffic and drive angrily over the pavement to go the other way
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Yossarian
Entirely unashamed ant car propaganda
Replies
7
Views
434
dessiato
dessiato
ska invita
Car diagnostic computer scanners
Replies
8
Views
325
mauvais
mauvais
A
First car / how do people afford cars when in low paid work?
2
Replies
56
Views
966
sojourner
S
kebabking
Car buying websites?
2
Replies
38
Views
1K
colacubes
colacubes
danny la rouge
Car insurance rocketing
2 3 4
Replies
115
Views
4K
Puddy_Tat
Puddy_Tat
Back
Top Bottom