Yep, its the latch mechanism, if I could sort and remove that, then it'd be like like a foot operated rear only actioning brake system, could really make things fun
Are modern cars too good?
- Thread starter StevenRB45
- Start date
Currently reading:
Are modern cars too good?
Yep, its the latch mechanism, if I could sort and remove that, then it'd be like like a foot operated rear only actioning brake system, could really make things fun
In fairness to your frankness, as has already been pointed out, although the ESP saved you from having to make an embarrassing phone call to a recovery agent, had there been another vehicle, and in your neck of the woods that could easily have been a truck, someone else could have been making a call on your behalf.
It could well have been a personal visit by someone wearing a hi-vis jacket and a white topped cap with a checkered band.
Just looked at the Google Maps link you included. It looks as if there should be a "Sharp deviation to the left" sign in front of you, unless someone has already taken it out. Also, is that a Royal Mail postbox just around the bend?
I must also admit that some road signs have come into disrepute due to mis-use by local authorities. I noticed from your video that there is a "Bend to the left" sign on the approach to that situation. There was a time when that sign would only have been used if a driver needed to reduce speed for the bend. Now they seem to be put up for little of no reason, even if no speed reduction is needed. I do sometimes wonder if there are so many signs that a lot of drivers find are unnecessary that they get ignored. The bend sign plus a "Sharp deviation" sign are definitely needed there.
Last edited:
This isn't far from me and a big problem in Norfolk and Suffolk at the moment (this is in Suffolk) is that lots of road signs in far reaching areas of the counties are quite literally falling apart, a set of 3 signs indicating a left bend in the road near me, poles rusted to the point that the signs dropped off the top. Others have rusted at ground level and fallen over, and the council are playing catch up trying to fix them but the left bed signs went 2 years without being fixed despite being reported.
As pointed out though MEP had driven the route before, it wasn't impossible to see the bend ahead, he simply got caught out and made a mistake, held his hands up and posted a video to show just how easy it is to get caught out.
OP
OP
This I have noticed, few examples this bend local to me was a car killer back in the 80s, note all the houses close to it have walls at the front to stop errant cars while further on has hedges.
https://goo.gl/maps/vThgMkvXPcR2
However since then the speed limit on it has halved...so you can now easily make it without slowing down at all but it still has chevrons and Slow markings.
This on the other hand half a mile away on a road that is still national speed limit..
https://goo.gl/maps/paieEk84Z442
All it gets is a painted slow sign...except that road is surface dressed so they disappear within 6 months of being repainted
It might be worth thinking for a moment about which speed limits we have, and why we have them.
When motorways were first introduced, with the (A6) Preston By-pass, there were no speed limits imposed on users. Think for a moment that this was first opened in about 1959, then think about the kind of cars that used the roads then. Typically, the most common were the Morris Minor 1000; the Ford Anglia; the Mini; Hillman Minx. Most of these cars had cross-ply tyres, all round drum brakes with no servos and headlights that would be disgraced by a modern LED torch. There were also quite a lot of cars around then that were made before WW2 and many that, although being made since then, were little more than continuations of 1930s designs that had just been in mothballs for several years and as such had no brakes on the rear at all. All of a sudden into the middle of this were press reports of Jaguar and Aston Martin using the soon to be opened M1 as a test track and reputedly hitting 150mph.
The only safety factor in play at that time was the fact that there was comparatively little traffic. But you also have to remember that there were almost no street lights on motorways until the '80s or '90s and in the '60s the name of Armco was only really known on some race tracks and even then, not all of them.
After all the headlines about E-Types and various DB models travelling at over twice the speed of most other traffic it was decided to introduce a 70 mph speed limit. But that limit only applied to motorways. What we now know as the National Speed Limit sign actually meant No Speed Limit. This meant that the local authority had decided not to apply a speed limit on a particular road. It was left up to the drivers to make their own decisions as to the speed they traveled at. At that time poor brakes weren't really an issue as many cars struggled to get up to enough speed between the bends to actually crash into anything. But this still meant that a car could be driven along a single carriageway road faster than on a motorway. The National part of it meant that wherever that sign was seen the limit applied to the kind of vehicle rather than the road.
The reason I mentioned the use of signs was because, generally speaking, if you drove along a road and there were no signs, advising for instance of bends, then there was no reason to reduce speed. Thus, if in 1975 I was driving a Viva HC, a contemporary car, I should be able to tackle that road with no reduction in speed. A Bend sign would mean slowing down a bit, and a Sharp Deviation sign would mean slowing down quite a lot.
A white arrow painted in the centre of the road should, in theory, mean that the road was about to bend to the left, or right, depending on which way the arrow pointed. In actual fact it was usually the opposite way. An arrow pointing to the left usually meant the road would be about to bend to the right, and vice-versa. The true meaning being that the driver should keep, or return to the left.
The word "Slow" painted on the road would usually be put there to highlight a "Hazard you can't yet see." For instance a concealed entrance or a junction that was in a dip in the road or just over the brow of a hill. An urban road less than a mile from where we live has "Slow" painted on the road four times in less than 200 yards. There are three driveways and a side road, none of which are easily seen as you drive along the road.
There have been plenty of times though in recent years where I've been driving along in the Panda, seen, for example, a "Bend" sign and slowed down, only to then wonder 'What happened to the bend?' So my earlier comment was made in reference to local councils over-doing it with the signs, so much so that bends that modern cars really don't need to slow down for are festooned with signs. Eventually, drivers may start to disregard signs on approach to hazards, only to find the only one for miles around that you really do need to slow down for.
While I (sort of) criticised MEP for ending up on the wrong side of the road, it certainly appeared as if there needed to be more warning of exactly how sharp that bend was than a single Bend sign.
Perhaps when dealing with bends on rural roads we should think of a couple of motor racing maxims:
1) Slow in - fast out.
2) Never go on the "gas" until you know you won't have to come back off it again.
When motorways were first introduced, with the (A6) Preston By-pass, there were no speed limits imposed on users. Think for a moment that this was first opened in about 1959, then think about the kind of cars that used the roads then. Typically, the most common were the Morris Minor 1000; the Ford Anglia; the Mini; Hillman Minx. Most of these cars had cross-ply tyres, all round drum brakes with no servos and headlights that would be disgraced by a modern LED torch. There were also quite a lot of cars around then that were made before WW2 and many that, although being made since then, were little more than continuations of 1930s designs that had just been in mothballs for several years and as such had no brakes on the rear at all. All of a sudden into the middle of this were press reports of Jaguar and Aston Martin using the soon to be opened M1 as a test track and reputedly hitting 150mph.
The only safety factor in play at that time was the fact that there was comparatively little traffic. But you also have to remember that there were almost no street lights on motorways until the '80s or '90s and in the '60s the name of Armco was only really known on some race tracks and even then, not all of them.
After all the headlines about E-Types and various DB models travelling at over twice the speed of most other traffic it was decided to introduce a 70 mph speed limit. But that limit only applied to motorways. What we now know as the National Speed Limit sign actually meant No Speed Limit. This meant that the local authority had decided not to apply a speed limit on a particular road. It was left up to the drivers to make their own decisions as to the speed they traveled at. At that time poor brakes weren't really an issue as many cars struggled to get up to enough speed between the bends to actually crash into anything. But this still meant that a car could be driven along a single carriageway road faster than on a motorway. The National part of it meant that wherever that sign was seen the limit applied to the kind of vehicle rather than the road.
The reason I mentioned the use of signs was because, generally speaking, if you drove along a road and there were no signs, advising for instance of bends, then there was no reason to reduce speed. Thus, if in 1975 I was driving a Viva HC, a contemporary car, I should be able to tackle that road with no reduction in speed. A Bend sign would mean slowing down a bit, and a Sharp Deviation sign would mean slowing down quite a lot.
A white arrow painted in the centre of the road should, in theory, mean that the road was about to bend to the left, or right, depending on which way the arrow pointed. In actual fact it was usually the opposite way. An arrow pointing to the left usually meant the road would be about to bend to the right, and vice-versa. The true meaning being that the driver should keep, or return to the left.
The word "Slow" painted on the road would usually be put there to highlight a "Hazard you can't yet see." For instance a concealed entrance or a junction that was in a dip in the road or just over the brow of a hill. An urban road less than a mile from where we live has "Slow" painted on the road four times in less than 200 yards. There are three driveways and a side road, none of which are easily seen as you drive along the road.
There have been plenty of times though in recent years where I've been driving along in the Panda, seen, for example, a "Bend" sign and slowed down, only to then wonder 'What happened to the bend?' So my earlier comment was made in reference to local councils over-doing it with the signs, so much so that bends that modern cars really don't need to slow down for are festooned with signs. Eventually, drivers may start to disregard signs on approach to hazards, only to find the only one for miles around that you really do need to slow down for.
While I (sort of) criticised MEP for ending up on the wrong side of the road, it certainly appeared as if there needed to be more warning of exactly how sharp that bend was than a single Bend sign.
Perhaps when dealing with bends on rural roads we should think of a couple of motor racing maxims:
1) Slow in - fast out.
2) Never go on the "gas" until you know you won't have to come back off it again.
Hi. Moved onto Norfolk in my 20's and joined young farmers so have spent many miles all over at night and a long way from home. The roads are often narrow and bendy but the saving grace is you can see other cars often for miles if you watch out. By rights should have found a ditch once or twice too so hats off to those who share. Had a Renault laguna much of that time which was simple but sure held the road. My gf panda was great fun, and the her chiquencento before that was a go cart
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,432
- Points
- 828
In these days of cars allegedly getting better, what I find a bit odd, is that for the Clio, Twingo, Polo, Up, Ibiza and Fabia, Renault and VW have fitted large seat side impact airbags rather than curtain airbags. Doesn't make sense!
Last edited:
Easier to change a seat rather than the whole interior setup during updates and facelifts.
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,432
- Points
- 828
But surely the passive safety system would remain the same?
Surely the whole point of fitting curtain airbags in the 1st place was to provide side impact head protection for rear seat passengers as well the front occupant?
OP
OP
They got 5 stars, VW doesn't see the point in excessive safety, or equipment so rear curtain airbags are available for a charge....
Can't stress enough how much I admire their commitment to gouging people.
Not looked into specing the other cars but imagine it's easier to fit seat bags then re-engineer shells that weren't designed for curtains.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,432
- Points
- 828
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,432
- Points
- 828
StevenRB45: joking aside, what I really don't get is why Renault don't fit curtain 'bags on their smaller cars. After all, their recent safety reputation was up there with Volvos, as a result of their ncap performance.
OP
OP
In fairness as Andy said they get full marks without curtains, so their side impact protection is still very good. They would be fitting them effectively for the sake of it.
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,432
- Points
- 828
I must admit, bearing in mind what euro ncap are like, I'm very surprised they didn't mark them down for not protecting rear occupants.
I wouldn't go as far as to say they'd be fitting curtain bags for the sake of it though: just because they can do well in the test without them, it doesn't mean they'd be of no use in real life accidents.
The larger seat air bags move back and forth with the seat so will always provide maximum protection no matter what position the seat is in.
The fact that they still get the 5 Star ratings without curtains shows that the curtains don't improve safety anymore than the larger seat bags.
Airbags are expensive, so the costs of curtains gets passed onto the buyers, the cars mentioned are all cheap cars, especially the up! The mii and the citigo.
If you have an accident the costs of replacing airbags is huge and can easily make the difference between a car being a write off or being repaired.
So no it's not surprising at all that they don't routinely include them.
The fact that they still get the 5 Star ratings without curtains shows that the curtains don't improve safety anymore than the larger seat bags.
Airbags are expensive, so the costs of curtains gets passed onto the buyers, the cars mentioned are all cheap cars, especially the up! The mii and the citigo.
If you have an accident the costs of replacing airbags is huge and can easily make the difference between a car being a write off or being repaired.
So no it's not surprising at all that they don't routinely include them.
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,432
- Points
- 828
It's a price I personally am happy to pay though, if it means better protection for friends and family sitting in the back. I do wonder though: if the side impact tests were performed with injury sensing adult dummies in the back as well as the front, would the manufacturers fit curtains as standard then...
OP
OP
I was under the impression there are front and rear seat occupancy scores which would suggest they use sensing dummies in both.
Depending on circumstances curtains could be advantageous, stopping flailing limbs going out of broken windows stopping heads coming into direct contact with the front panel of high riding cars. But these aren't tested by NCAP so in testing terms not necessary.
Manufacturers have huge crash testing facilities of their own, they do far more testing than Ncap ever do. The removal of curtains on smaller cheaper models will be based on there own testing and not anything that ncap does.
Most of these smaller cars either won't have people in the back at all, or they have children in the back. Ncap can't feasibly test for all eventualities such as adult rear occupants, children. Baby seats in rear etc etc, they do side front run someone over and that's about it.
Go have a look round the Internet, you'll see that curtain airbags are really much more effective in preventing fatalities than combination seat bags
