Learner drivers could be allowed on motorways.

Currently reading:
Learner drivers could be allowed on motorways.

got to be careful with limiting power though coz that can cause problems.

I remember when me and a mate went to newquay for a week. Some of the hills in cornwall my punto struggled with quite bad specially loaded with me, my mate and all our stuff.

I'm all for limiting though even now with 3 years under my belt i would happily be subject to restrictions (though you cant go much less then an 8v punto :p) especially if it ment lower insurance

something like the Australian system could work
 
Last edited:
Limiting power and distance is stupid. If you give a car to an idoit they will cause an accident regardless of power or distance from home.

Far too many cars on the road as it is. Tougher punishment for driving offences, trackers for younger drivers, and life bans for repeat offenders is the way to thin them out IMO.
 
Last edited:
I disagree. Give an inexperienced male a beautiful lady and he'll jizz his pants before the conversation has even started.

Give him a fat munter and he'll go all night.

Of course, we do need to take power/weight ratio in to account, so maybe that would be a better way to limit?
 
Limiting power and distance is stupid. If you give a car to an idoit they will cause an accident regardless of power or distance from home.

Far too many cars on the road as it is. Tougher punishment for driving offences, trackers for younger drivers, and life bans for repeat offenders is the way to thin them out IMO.

How is limiting power stupid? Sure you can still kill easily with a 1 litre Corsa, however less likely due to showing off etc like some are more likely to in a higher powered car etc.

Again how will a tracker make people drive better?

Agreed on the tougher punishments, and life bans for repeat offenders would be nice although a lot never seem to let a 18month ban stop them from driving unfortunately (n) although I suppose that's where the tougher punishments side of things would come into play.
 
How is limiting power stupid? Sure you can still kill easily with a 1 litre Corsa, however less likely due to showing off etc like some are more likely to in a higher powered car etc.

You answered your own question.

Its not what you drive its how you drive that matters. The reason young drivers pay high insurance is because they are a high risk. That risk could be reduced using tracking/black box technology. It is far more effective than everyone under 25 driving around in 30bhp Reliant Robins. Everything they did in their vehicle would be monitored and if they mess up they loose their license. A similar system is already in place and is effective.
 
Is there a similar system in place?

I know there are insurers that monitor time the car is driven at and stupid things like that but speed etc?

Yes speed, time of day, distance is all monitored and it wouldn't take much to increase the amount of things that were monitored, G force for example.

The reason insurance companies give big discounts to young drivers that have this technology installed is because it works, they are better drivers because its installed.

Edit.
The drivers can save upto 15 to 17 percent on their car insurance premiums by the help of their good driving habits. The device collects the data regarding the distance covered by the driver, speed, driving quality, braking and cornering ability.
http://www.carinsurancecomparisonsi...e-premium-of-young-drivers-by-driving-tracker
 
Last edited:
ATM the majority of these blackboxes impose curfews on driving times during early hours. It's mainly only these that are currently reducing premiums IMO.

At no point in that link or others does it say if regularly showing they drive crap their premiums increase. Because they don't. The only time the driver is penalised is if the vehicle is used outside of the curfew.
 
Last edited:
I said a better idea would be to use a tracking/black box technology to monitor young drivers.

I said it was a similar system that works. I didn't i say they were penalised or their premiums increased.

I'm sure the system could be updated and used to monitor and penalise bad drivers quite easily.

There is no restriction on the miles to drive on but the box users can give an estimated number of miles he will drive throughout the year. In case the predicted number is exceeded, then there will be rise in the premium slightly and the driver will have to pay a one-off charge also.
http://www.carinsurancecomparisonsi...e-premium-of-young-drivers-by-driving-tracker

That equals penalised IMO.
 
Last edited:
the compaines that use black boxes still screw you over, i done quotes with everyone i could find and all of them came back more then i was paying for normal insurance

I couldnt use them anyway my job means whenever I work I dont get home till gone 1 in the morning
 
You answered your own question.

Its not what you drive its how you drive that matters. The reason young drivers pay high insurance is because they are a high risk. That risk could be reduced using tracking/black box technology. It is far more effective than everyone under 25 driving around in 30bhp Reliant Robins. Everything they did in their vehicle would be monitored and if they mess up they loose their license. A similar system is already in place and is effective.
Quite right, it is how you drive. BUT, put the vast majority of young drivers in an aggressive car and they'll drive more aggressively. Less than a week ago we had an 18 year old driver in a Citroen Saxo VTsomething or other who managed to crash it into a wall. It had probably been quite a decent motor at some stage. This one was replete with alloys, big stereo, that was still blasting out when the (first) ambulance arrived, Pipercross (type) filter, exhaust that looked like it had come off a Yamaha R1 and regulation column of manufacturers logos on the leading edge of the doors.

A Traffic Patrol was in the area already after reports of "someone driving like a maniac" round and round the area. Still, an ambulance got there first in response to a 999 call, followed by another four as the caller stated that there were "loads of people in the car". Fire also responded due to the state of the car and several gallons of unleaded covering the floor and the belief that cutting gear would be needed.

The four occupants were aggressive to the ambulance crews and refused treatment and denied a witness's report that others had run from the car. Four of the ambulances left leaving one behind. They were then called back after a girl got out of the car and collapsed with a broken leg and another started coughing up blood and a third was adjudged to have concussion. They also admitted there had been two others in the car who had legged it. Better call up the helicopter to look for them then.

The driver was in an urban area fairly close to home and in a 30 limit, but driving a relatively high powered, light car with an aggressive "attitude".

The driver's attitude is also important and you can have older more experienced drivers still crashing, but if you take 1) a young driver in 2) a "sporty/aggressive" car who is 3) driving at night 4) is with a group of his peers and 5) driving outside the kind of roads he learnt on then as actuaries will tell you, the chance of (probably a) him having a crash is dramatically increased.

As for the black box/trakker type thingy, what happens if a parent is driving? If you give someone a car of limited performance and, don't forget the "aggressive car syndrome" that will certainly reduce his chances of stuffing it. But if you give that driver a faster/more powerful car with a monitoring device how do you know who's driving it?

As for 30bhp Reliant Robins, all I can say is.....brilliant, superb. You truly are a genius, I wish I'd thought of that. You can't drive them fast or they'll fall over in corners and bends, and if you do hit anything head on you'll be impaled on the steering column. Not only that, but it will teach young drivers smoothness and good driving technique.
 
I think you've got a point on restricting power but 30mile radius :nutter:. If I had that limitation my earning potential at that age would have been seriously compromised and I wouldn't have had the excellent work opportunaties that where availible to me due to me having my own car and a license.

This would have had a knock on effect holding me back 2-3 years.
Might be wrong here, but I don't remember saying that young/new drivers wouldn't be able to drive more than 30 miles from home, simply that they should take further training to be allowed to do so, which is where we came in.

Unfortunatly standards of driving are never going to get better IMO. Only thursday on my way home from work I witnessed a driving instruction on his own in a fully marked instructor car join a dual carrage way, and do several lane changes without signalling once. I often think I'm the one in the wrong signalling when changing lane, and not sitting in the middle lane when not over taking on motorways.

Regards to restricting the radius new drivers can drive, utterly pointless IMO. The majority of accident apparently happen within 10 miles of home apparently, but regardless of this I can't see how creating a radius would prevent accidents.

Limiting power however is a good idea IMO though, although I do agree with Chris about the Darwin awards side of things :p
I obviously couldn't comment on the Driving Instructor in question, but the DSA advises that drivers should signal where it would help another road user, and not signal all the time for every lane change, change of speed or corner. If you walk into an empty room do you say hello? Of course not, so why indicate if no-one would benefit. I often turn corners, change lanes and join or leave motorways without signalling. If a driver's maneouvre will not cause another driver to change speed or direction, why signal. Drivers use signals as a safety net which then removes from them the need to use observation which is the most important aspect of a lane change. The Darwinian theory is an interesting one, but has one major drawback: The driver usually survives but the passengers are usually the ones who cop for the injuries.....or worse.

Restriction to a radius would be stupid. How would it be enforced? So if the restriction was 7 Miles and I went to my Grans that's 6.9 miles away, how would I get to my shop that's 7.1 miles away?;)

Dom
I did say it could be difficult to enforce, but the powers that be manage it with motorcycles. Plus the fact it's relatively easy for the Cops to judge the age of a driver they see, but almost impossible to do it for someone wearing a full face helmet. Plus the fact that 7 miles would be ridiculous, 30 being far more practical. But, if you're drawing the conclusion that young/new drivers can't drive outside the given radius at all, all they need do is take the further training. A young lad I taught to drive several years ago had a number of crashes in his car, so much so that seeing he was on a limited income being an apprentice, his father refused to help him pay for a new clutch which was slipping badly and therefore acted as a speed limiter. It still didn't stop him stuffing his Astra into the front of a 4WD coming the other way on a bend. If only he'd taken Pass+ he might have learnt how to take a bend properly.
 
Last edited:
Might be wrong here, but I don't remember saying that young/new drivers wouldn't be able to drive more than 30 miles from home, simply that they should take further training to be allowed to do so, which is where we came in.

How would further training make it safer for young drivers to drive further from home? The only thing lacking in the current system is training on dual carraigeways / motorways IMO.

From what I gather it's not a skill shortage it's an attitude problem with 90% of young driver crashes / fatalities. Prooven by the wealth of "race" threads that pop up, "could my punto knack a corsa in a straight line?". Those kind of theads :rolleyes:.

Harsh punishments for dangerous driving would sort that. If convicted as well as the usual punishment you get your car seized, sold or crushed.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top