Besbie said:

they wouldn't lower it. the government would lose too much money. sposedly at 40 less fuel would be used, the government doesn't just have the tax on petrol to try to limit consumption. also currently the motorways are the safest roads in britain i believe. also businesses would be hugely affected. it's just someone throwing up an idea to try and gain themselves publicity.

on the subject of inaccurate speedos. going over the severn bridge when wet. the metal strips can cause wheelspin.

Click to expand...

yeah but thats bloody scary! i did it comming from the welsh meet!

faster4_tec said:

nope, most cars are at their most economical at around 55-65mph, where the car is not revving that hard, and air resistance is only just starting to affect anything.
if your car can do 110mph and its more economical than it is at say 60mph, I'm noddy holder


and bulldog, your car is lame if it can't burn out in 3rd
t'old 2.0 NA volvo can do a burnout, in 3rd, reading 65mph+ whilst towing an 1800kilo merc estate *

Click to expand...

oh no the engine didnt stop, revs carried on, speedo went to 0 vibration stopped and i smoke poured out and i relised i toasted the clutch i get 60mph at the wheels in 2nd anyway

If you would like to tell this minister what you think of her ideas, follow this link to email her:

http://www.upmystreet.com/commons/email/l/595.html

:devil:

Road planners in general are thick. Instead of sittign down and REALLY thinking of ways to improve roads, they just slap a crossing wherever they feel like it, and create a tailback that's 10 times longer than it was in ruch hour, and possibly takes an extra 7 - 10 mins to get through the same section of road (yes, my town is a prime example). Everywhere I go I see things done to roads that are obviously going to slow the flow down and cause congestion. Why can't we get clever people to work out and design good roads to get the maximum efficency from them instead of making then worse :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: AAAAhhhhh F*UCK!!! Im going MAD JUST THINKING ABOUT IT! And all these friggin politicians who are all too quick to suggest slapping big taxes because you drive a biggish engined car, its all just to make money (well duh!). If they really gave a toss, they should throw money at alternative energy technology, so some boffins somewhere can make engines that run on air or something. Taxing people isnt really solving any problems in the long term.

I'd think that most cars would be the most economical at the lowest rpm they can hold in top gear

Click to expand...

yeah lowest rpm's without labouring the engine.

so for a petrol like a 1.2 punto, its abou 1900rpm, maybe higher, depending on whats in teh car.
for like your 20v marea, its probably still around the 1800/1900rpm mark in top gear (because its a 4valve engine, its still petrol, and its a much bigger/heavier car)
for a diesel its as low as 1400rpm, as low as 1250rpm on something big, like the new big diesel audis (3.0tdi v6 and 4.2ttdi v8)

bulldog5046 said:

oh no the engine didnt stop, revs carried on, speedo went to 0 vibration stopped and i smoke poured out and i relised i toasted the clutch i get 60mph at the wheels in 2nd anyway

Click to expand...

pah, can't even handle breaking traction in 3rd! You need a better clutch, if not engine . The V70 can easily break traction in 4th, 5th can be difficult... unless it's wet.

stupid idea. should raise the spped limit in conjunction with cars becoming safer and faster, not bloody lower it!!

I couldn't do much more than 40 today, the M62 turned into a river and people were aquaplaning left right and center