Clearly you haven't been privileged to drive 300+ horsepower V8 pickup trucks like half my graduating class in high school! Not only did they start their driving career driving power hungry (and fuel hungry) full size 4x4s and 4x2s with lift kits and I/H/E mods but they also took them racing at Morosso, off-roading (real off-roading with mud and jumps and water forging and winching) at "the Hump", and would come to school with trucks that had a fresh coat of "everglades mud" gray! It was always amazing that their trucks survived the abuse, too, but then again, OLDER Chevrolet and Dodge trucks were really built "Like A Rock". And I stand by my word that Fords are floppy, poorly-built trucks. I've driven them alongside the competition and... bleh.

Of course, the other half of the senior class drove real expensive "my rich daddy bought me a brand new BMW" cars or Honda Civics. Mainly Honda Civics.

I have driven a 2007 Silverado LT CREW CAB with the 4.8L Vortec V8. Its power (all top end, great for speed bad for towing) was counterbalanced by its MASSIVE girth! Although it was running 295 BHP, it took too long to see that, given the torque didn't peak 305 ft-lbs. until 4800 RPM. However, it was pretty cool to be able to get to 50 MPH in one gear. Handling and braking, though, leave a LOT to be desired. Driving a huge pickup truck is like driving a bus. If someone stops hard in front of me, it's my fault whether I like it or not, 'cause it ain't gonna stop for another ten miles!

This is the kind of vehicle many Americans learn to drive on. You HAVE to be a safe driver to even think of driving a truck!

Quote from Woz :

I am interested in your 3 years driving experience, where was this gained. Please do not say LFS.

Private roads on a weekly basis, and circuit training with a qualified race instructor.

I don't have time to run through all the responses right now, I'll do so later on - but I will say I've driven a Lotus Exige for half an hour at race speed without trouble, in damp conditions, if a marker on my experience/ability is needed by anyone.

The thought of 'most teenage drivers' seems to keep recurring too, and I stress that I do not by any means propose that all drivers at the age of sixteen, fifteen, even seventeen should be allowed to drive on the roads - but that they are subject to far more stringent tests, along with some sort of assessment of their level of respect for the car and other road users, and sense of responsibility concerning driving. I think the current UK road driving test is far too easy, and lets far too many idiots onto the roads. I don't want the laws changing so I can drive in the nearer future, I'd like to see a change that doesn't penalise good drivers whilst allowed morons to carry on endangering people.

Sam

I dunno, that's the problem, everyone thinks "It's everyone else, not me, blah blah", when the stupid stuff I've seen done (and done myself) is remarkable, I think that cops should have the ability to give people mandatory drivers training or they get their licence taken away if they get observed doing something absolutely stupid (like running stop signs or making a California Stop while driving around the block...)

Quote from Dark Elite :

I don't want the laws changing so I can drive in the nearer future, I'd like to see a change that doesn't penalise good drivers whilst allowed morons to carry on endangering people.

I like your style, cool and rational, and thoroughly agree with you. I think Woz is on a hiding to nothing arguing about power figures... Power is irrelevant when you consider that the primary skill required for driving on the road is AWARENESS.

If you are aware - of your car, of the driving conditions, of the surrounding environment - then you can drive anything. And awareness is not a natural ability that some have and some do not - it is a skill that can be taught.

In the UK, you are much more likely to acquire this skill if you do Compulsory Basic Training for a motorcycle. The CBT isn't a test, its a training day and the fact that car drivers do not have something similar is appalling.

I don't think tests need to be more rigorous, that's a red herring... But training does have to be more thorough. Make people ride a bicycle or a moped in city traffic for a week. That alone would increase awareness skills by a significant factor, making a glance over the shoulder, before any manoeuvre, a reflex action as natural as undoing your flies before taking a piss.

What's up with all the more power = more speed = more dangerous nonsense? I agree that more power is more dangerous, but in my opinion it's a psychological phenomenon, not a speed issue. Heck I've done stupid things like driving >110mph in my 21yr old 115hp Audi 100, so a "low" powered 136hp car is more than enough to reach stupid speeds.

The problem of high powered cars goes IMO more like this:
More power = more grunt = more manly = more testosterone = more stupid decisions (like driving too fast).

Quote from nihil :

In the UK, you are much more likely to acquire this skill if you do Compulsory Basic Training for a motorcycle. The CBT isn't a test, its a training day and the fact that car drivers do not have something similar is appalling.

I dont know if it's different for a "proper" bike but when i did my CBT for my bike i just went to a car park and, in effect, dicked about with a crappy scooter - went round some cones, emergency stops, was taught how to look at the road and how to look as you move across the road (cue random shout of "LIFESAVER!") and then just going out on a road and trying to do it. TBH i think that a driving lesson would teach you the same stuff.

I did my CBT with someone else doing there 125 Direct Access course and they did the same thing only having to worry about a Clutch...

Quote from Jakg :

I dont know if it's different for a "proper" bike but when i did my CBT for my bike i just went to a car park and, in effect, dicked about with a crappy scooter

The CBT is the same for all classes of motorcycle, it's all about slow control ("dicking about" as you put it...) and awareness (it almost certainly wasn't a random shout of "Lifesaver" since that glance over your shoulder should be part of a very particular routine)

The CBT has proved itself statistically in reducing road deaths, but I think the real benefit is that it has introduced the notion of training as a developmental thing to motorcyclists.

A test is just something you pass and forget about. Training is something you consider as an ongoing thing: once you have your licence you might think about advanced training with a police instructor, or a sportsbike school... whatever...

Motorcyclists are much more likely to consider these options, and I don't think that's just because we are generally more enthusiastic about our machines (though that is admittedly part of it). All I can say is that when I did my CBT, riding home was like being on a different bike to the one I rode to the training centre on. But the bike hadn't changed at all. I had.

I think Woz has a point there. It's a statisatical proven fact, at least here in austria, that most traffic casualties are (ore are caused by) people between the age of 18 and 24 years with cars that have more than 100 hp (and in austria, due to fuel prices, taxes and insurance, a car with more than 100 hp is very expensive to run).

It boils down to a simple equation: the longer it takes for you to reach speeds where you can't control the car anymore, the less chance there is to reach those speeds. And especially younger drivers really tend to overestimate their abilities while underestimating the danger for themselves and others, which leads to very unreasonable driving styles.

And concerning the 136 hp is too slow: that might be the case for 2.5 tons of automatic transmission crippled trucks, but my 90 hp 900 kg toyota can be driven quite agressively, and it reaches 180 km/h on the autobahn quicker than I like it.

So I too am for a system similar to that we have for motorbikes: you basically have to earn the privilege to drive ones with bigger engines.

I completely agree that you should have to earn the right to drive bigger, faster cars. I just don't think that everyone should necessarily have to start out with a 90 bhp car. People have different driving abilities and they should be rewarded.

I should mention that 90 bhp to me seems TERRIBLY slow because most vehicles over here weigh twice as much as your cars. I'm trying to imagine my 1500 kg Subaru with 90 bhp and I can't see that thing moving any faster than a snail.

Maybe limit new drivers to 70hp/tonne for the first year, 90hp/tonne for the second year, and 200hp/tonne in the third year before allowing any vehicle.

And this applies more to the UK, where we have corners and more than 1 car per square mile, than the States where a light car is considered as up to 3 tonnes, a weedy car is considered to have less than 300hp, and the drivers are considered to have 1 brain cell.

Yeah - there's not much you can do about the stupidity over here. I do have to say a big part of the problem with people in America driving poorly is the way they are taught, and the laws. Not once did my driving instructor tell me to keep right - just to stay out of the left lane. They simply don't seem to care to teach you the stuff that makes you DRIVE well, they just teach you not to run red lights and what a stop sign is. The stuff everyone knows anyway. They say "be aware" but that's it. They SHOULD tell people things like, "the light's green, but you should always glance left-right anyone to make sure no-one is running the intersection."

In fact, the driving instructor that is linked to our school is known to fall asleep most of the time and just lets the kid drive around for two hours. My dad got terribly angry when we were behind him one day teaching some student how to drive, and the student pulled out not into the near lane, but all the way across into the far lane. My dad started yelling at him out the window about how he wasn't teaching anything and shouldn't be an instructor at the next light, lol.

And then the laws don't help. They should make it like they do in Europe, where you have to leave your blinker on when passing. That might get people to move over.

Of course, in some places, people drive well. I'm from New Jersey, where no-one drives correctly, but down here in Virginia, they don't need 7-lane highways, because everyone leapfrogs like they should and just drives correctly.

Also, that's the other point. As you stated, in the UK, in many parts (particularly the cities) it is MUCH more dangerous for someone to have a powerful car. Here in VA, I honestly don't see the issue with someone being allowed a little more power. The roads are simply much more open, and there are much fewer drivers. Which is simply another example of why there really isn't a good STANDARD for everyone.

Quote from Stang70Fastback :

I still don't think you can call a 136bhp car 'fast.'

136bhp in a lightweight hatch back is a lot of power. 90bhp is more than enough to get most cars over 100mph, at which speed the idea of something going wrong isn't nice.

Quote from Stang70Fastback :

I only heard of maybe a handful who managed to crash their cars - and those cars were: new Toyota Scion... another new Toyota Scion, a Ford Mustang, a Camaro. There were quite a few tiny accidents, but none were the result of overpowered cars, more underpowered brains and the inability to watch the car in front of them in heavy 5mph traffic on the way to and from school.

In the UK we have corners and narrow tree lined roads, meaning it's a lot easier for people to crash from driving too fast and head ons are a particularly nasty result of people driving too fast down narrow roads, on a lot of UK roads too fast is less than the speed limit and a lot less than even the most basic cars will happily cruise at. When we say too much power we're not talking about controlling the power quite like you're thinking, more simply a car that ends up traveling at silly speeds too easily.

Quote from Dark Elite :

Private roads on a weekly basis, and circuit training with a qualified race instructor.

That scares me so you reckon you can drive fast but you've yet to learn to deal with traffic or have to read an unknown road or drive in the dark yet you've obviously got a desire to drive fast. I'd have said that a 136bhp saloon is definitely not a sensible car for you to learn in.

Quote from ajp71 :

136bhp in a lightweight hatch back is a lot of power. 90bhp is more than enough to get most cars over 100mph, at which speed the idea of something going wrong isn't nice.

The thing is, you guys have this idea that every kid who owns a car WILL drive 100 mph whenever they get the chance - or at least that is what you make it sound like. This is simply not true. I have never gone 100 mph in my car. Even when I was with my friend and we were on a secluded strip of road where EVERYONE takes their cars to go 150 mph or faster because it is straight, has open fields on both sides, and no cops and he pushed me to do so, I refused. Admittedly, I am sure many kids try to break 100 mph at least once when they get a new car. My parents did it when they got their new minivan, and a new Bonneville. Everyone will do it at least ONCE just out of curiosity, but most people are not going to do it again.

If it's that much of a worry, put a limiter on the car, or toss a GPS unit in the trunk. But don't force someone to learn to drive in a car that does not have enough power to accelerate onto the highway or out of a dangerous situation.

In reference to the above stat

I don't approve of artificially limiting cars via GPS or whatever, because that will cause more desperate driving, and stupier overtaking.

However, being the UK, we'll just roll over and accept it, like with Gatsos, Health and Safety crap, windfarms, ID cards (1984?), the Euro (eventually, even it though it will bring only downsides), banning smoking etc. We're losing human rights faster than you can shake a tiny stick in a hummingbirds wing.

You might be a sensible driver (or a complete pussy, depending on your point of view - there is such a thing as safe speed, but knowing when to attempt it comes with experience and not bravery - the opposite of what most, but not all youngsters have), but I'd guess that statistics put you in a lonely 5 - 10% of your vague age group. Teenagers are reckless - always have been, always will be - as a group. Removing/limiting them so that their uncontrolled recklessness doesn't result in people (and not just the youngsters) driving is a good thing.

Oh, and about my comment about being an adult further up - in the UK you are not legally considered grown up or an adult until you are 18. Therefore you are a child and a minor. Clear as daylight.

Quote from tristancliffe :

I don't approve of artificially limiting cars via GPS or whatever, because that will cause more desperate driving, and stupider overtaking.

I'm just curious, could you elaborate on that? I don't understand what you mean.

Quote from tristancliffe :

Oh, and about my comment about being an adult further up - in the UK you are not legally considered grown up or an adult until you are 18. Therefore you are a child and a minor. Clear as daylight.

I take it you're referring towards me someone else?

Imagine you are stuck behind a lorry at 50mph in a 60 limit. It will be a lot MORE dangerous if the limited car pulls out to overtake, but cannot continue accelerating for the duration of the overtake = dangerous! Remove the limiter, and the person can continue accelerating to above the speed limit, reducing the TED (time exposed to danger - a real and genuine term), and improving safety. The overtaking car can then slow down again to the speed limit.

That's just one example. There are lots more to do with active safety and what-not. Plus, who REALLY wants Big Brother controlling EVERYTHING THEY FECKING DO AND SEEING WHEREVER THEY FECKING GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!


The other bit wasn't at you, but the schoolboy with the mundaneo.

Quote from Stang70Fastback :

The thing is, you guys have this idea that every kid who owns a car WILL drive 100 mph whenever they get the chance - or at least that is what you make it sound like. This is simply not true. I have never gone 100 mph in my car. Even when I was with my friend and we were on a secluded strip of road where EVERYONE takes their cars to go 150 mph or faster because it is straight, has open fields on both sides, and no cops and he pushed me to do so, I refused. Admittedly, I am sure many kids try to break 100 mph at least once when they get a new car.

In the UK a lot of people like driving fast. Compared to the states typical cars are about half the weight and don't fall over when presented with a corner, which we have lots of. In the UK you can't just get in your automatic barge get up to 50 and leave it there for a few hours our driving requires much more activity from the driver, due to roads and traffic. I think most of my friends have done the far side of the ton in cars that struggle to get there and a lot do enjoy messing about in a car, which can be fun so long as one doesn't get carried away and it's by no means just car made males who drive fast, I know several girls who have no problem driving far faster than you'd drive on the highway down narrow lanes in the middle of the night, which can be done reasonably safely if one's aware of the risks and can plan ahead the problem comes when people aren't ready to do it. There have been quite a few single car multiple-fatality accidents locally all due to young drivers in small hatchbacks wrapping themselves round trees at high speed whilst obviously trying to drive fast so the argument that few young drivers will drive quickly just doesn't hold in this country.

Quote from tristancliffe :

Imagine you are stuck behind a lorry at 50mph in a 60 limit. It will be a lot MORE dangerous if the limited car pulls out to overtake, but cannot continue accelerating for the duration of the overtake = dangerous! Remove the limiter, and the person can continue accelerating to above the speed limit, reducing the TED (time exposed to danger - a real and genuine term), and improving safety. The overtaking car can then slow down again to the speed limit.

Alright. I thought you were going to say it was SAFER in the limited cars because they didn't have the power to pass without going over the limit and so wouldn't try, in which case I was going to say that that was a stupid idea, since people need to be able to be aggressive on occasion - even teenage drivers. But I see that that's what you were saying, so cool.

Yeah, I guess you cannot have the same standards in both the UK and the US due to the differences in the roads, infrastructure, cars, etc...

I guess in the end the point I am trying to get acorss is that no matter how much "experience" a new driver feels they have on the road they are not "battle hardend".

By this I mean prepared for the utter stupidity you will see and encounter on the road on a daily basis. The ONLY thing that actually prepars you for it is experience.

I am the first to admit that the road is full of people that can't drive and should not have a licence, and age does not factor in that.

I would say anyones first year on the road will open their eyes to the worst of human nature. After a year you have learnt enough to realise how defensive you have to be around other people. They do not do what you expect and when you expect like a stract driver.

Until you "go solo" in a car and have to fight your way across a large city you are unfamiliar with you will not realise the presures that build if you let it etc. Couple that stress with a new young driver and a 300bhp car and you WILL get problems.

The NZ issues are a special case I believe. The original idea for 15 year old drivers is that NZ is very sparsly populated mostly rural. So kids need to get about. The licence for young drivers is limited so they can't drive late at night and they can't carry passengers. There is also a far lower drink drive limit for younger drivers, I think the change point is 25.

All that worked fine in the past until the very cheap high performance cars became available. I can get an old WRX under $10000 (£4000). When the cheap performance came so did the F&F like problems. Huge groups (100s) collected together to have burnouts etc.

I am NOT saying that there are not responsible drivers at 17. What I am saying is that at 17 your body is still fighting you. Testosterone can be a cruel master until you learn to deal with it and learn wheen it is talking and when it is you.

I actually like the P plate idea. Where you have to put P plates (jusst passed) for the first year so that others on the road KNOW and can cut you some slack.

Quote from Woz :

Until you "go solo" in a car and have to fight your way across a large city you are unfamiliar with you will not realise the presures that build if you let it etc.

Reminds me of me of my few endeavors in New York City. That was loads of fun.

But yeah, nothing can replace real-life experience. In my two short years driving solo, I have avoided being rear ended (flooring it to get out of the way of a sliding car) which I must say was directly a result of my situational awareness, being side-swiped, and being slid into on icy roads multiple times. I fail to understand how those little old ladies get in as few accident as they do, since I have avoided many CERTAIN incidents simply by paying attention to others. I've even been behind a convertible 20 feet in front of me at 70 mph that over corrected when he had to swerve to avoid a car that cut him off, spun out and slammed into the center barrier. I had to brake HARD, stay in my lane, and then squeeze between two cars in the lane to the right because the truck on my left had to move over to avoid hitting the convertible himself. I really think a driving course JUST teaching situational and active awareness should be mandatory.

Quote from Woz :

Until you "go solo" in a car and have to fight your way across a large city you are unfamiliar with you will not realise the presures that build if you let it etc.

Then whatever you do, don't try to drive through Miami, Florida. You will either kill yourself from the pressure or some angry Hispanic will kill you when you cut him/her off.

Miami, FL is rated by Insurance Groups as the city with the worst drivers in America!

OK, this thread has gone 110% off topic and it's run considerably more than its course.

We've established that this feature is found predomenantly on large American cars which are normally found with automatics.

This would not be found in a Mini/Citroen Saxo/Vauxhall Calibra/Porsche 911. Therefore, LFS does not need it on them. However, should we get such a car it would be welcome.

Thank you and goodnight.

It is true that 17 year olds are the most irresponsible drivers. Today, I saw a kid in a monstrous diesel-powered ford F250 attempt driving on the wrong side of the road illegally to pass the people making right turns into the school. He gets into the left lane, and then floors it without even looking. He almost hits a poor woman in a Honda Civic head on at 20mph each. Luckily he slammed on his brakes and sat there blocking the path of the Civic. The Civic, being road-blocked by a giant Ford pickup truck had no path to take other then into the school. And after this I saw some **** in an infiniti do the same exact thing. I really didn't feel like seeing a woman die because a tank ran over her car.

Quote from ajp71 :

I can genuinely say I've never started a car in gear accidentally. I have let the clutch out forgetting it was in gear before though, which is a far worse mistake to make TBH



No that's got more to do with general complete disregard for traffic rules than difficulties starting

I have an '84 supra and I managed to turn the starter on once while in gear without the clutch. More just happened through reflex though, where I had the car parked I normally left it in neutral and expected it to be in neutral without checking. And it's not that insane, like my mom's automatic '02 echo (sold as something else in europe, goofy toyota econobox) has a lockout that prevents you from taking it out of park until your foot is on the brake. But you can still turn the car on as long as it's in park (which it will be considering you can't take the key out without it being in park).

There's no reason not to have some of these little fixes in there, actually kind of stupid to not have some of them. One thing I've learned in web development, is if you have something that's used by a general sample of the population, if you can put a 'user error' catch in there without inconveniencing everyone else, you should. Never underestimate the stupidity of the 'lower half' of any populous, plus no one's perfect and mistakes happen. But, yes, we have become an overly cautious sue-happy culture in general. I've experienced some of it first-hand after accidentally breaking someone's arm back in middle school attempting to get an item back from them that belonged to a friend of mine. (Spun him around by his shirt and let go, fell on his arm badly.) We offered to pay medical expenses etc., don't hear anything from them until a couple years later when their lawyer calls. Our insurance took care of it all at least. (This incident was so horribly 'my fault' that the school never talked to me about it or punished me for it.)

Quote from Impreza WRX :

Then whatever you do, don't try to drive through Miami, Florida. You will either kill yourself from the pressure or some angry Hispanic will kill you when you cut him/her off.

Miami, FL is rated by Insurance Groups as the city with the worst drivers in America!

I have been driving 22 years so nothing like that really hold fear now. Even driving in Paris (Anyone that has ever done this will know you take you life in your own hands )

I am saying that any new driver, no matter how "great" they believe themselves to be is in for a real shock when they hit real life road networks. As you say, there are situations that no driving test prepares you for

At 17, there is no such thing as greatness behind the wheel either. That is just testosterone talking and that in itself is a danger lol

I bet there is not a single person here that will dispute the 3 facts I posted earlier but I am happy to hear from someone that does. Here they are again

1) The more powerful the car the MORE chance it is involved in a crash.
2) The younger the driver the MORE chance they are involved in a crash. (Take the old gits out of this as the rule changes as you approach adult nappy stage )
3) The more experience behind the wheel the LESS chance you are involved in a crash.

Yes they are generalisations but on the whole they are right. Anyone disagree? (This should be fun as there is a HUGE body of evidence out there to back these up BTW)