AK350Z Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7989110.stm I don't get the connection. The proportion of "boy racers" carrying NOS must be tiny, and the subset of them causing an accident even more so! Why not go after Wee Neds with bald or cheap tyres that double the braking distance! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N1SM0350z Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Link wouldnt work for me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 idots, what there refering to is not the modified scene, but young drivers. i agree that young drivers are the most dangerous on the road, (sorry young people )and young lads under 25 are most likely to have a crash. so what they need to do is not legislate mods for cars rather legislate what young people can drive. any one under 25 is going to hate me now what they need to do to reduce that statisitic is limit the engine size that young drivers can drive. i'd say nothing over 1.4 for first 3 years of driving 1.6 for following 3 years up to 1.8 following 2 years. that takes you up to 25. or say that young drivers are limited to under 100bhp till they're 25. insurance companies already do this to a point by financially raping young people on big cars, and try and price you off your decision. prime example is one of my sixth formers just got a clio 182 and his insurance for 3rd party only is £2500. but his aprents apy for it as they have the money. my honest opinion is drive what you like but if your in experienced and buy something you can't handle, don't be surprised if you wrap yourself around a tree with in 18 months. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chesterfield Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 I would agree that younger drivers and higher powered cars increase the risk of accidents and even death considerably. The "solution" as I see it would be to legislate against the combination of younger drivers and cars with a certain power to weight ratio. However, as is usually the case wth any legislation, the government and its advisory bodies will know less about the given subject than can be fitted on the back of a fag packet, so will no doubt eventually come up with legislation that not only targets the specific problem group, but also affects everyone else who is more likely to be responsible (at a price of course). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARphotographs Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 so what they need to do is not legislate mods for cars rather legislate what young people can drive. any one under 25 is going to hate me now what they need to do to reduce that statisitic is limit the engine size that young drivers can drive. i'd say nothing over 1.4 for first 3 years of driving 1.6 for following 3 years up to 1.8 following 2 years. that takes you up to 25. or say that young drivers are limited to under 100bhp till they're 25. This already is in force for motorbikes, if you are under 21, and want a full bike license you need to do your A2 test, which restricts you to 33bhp for 2 years, then after your 2 years, you can ride anything you want. So if you pass on your 17th birthday, you can ride anything you want after your 19th bday, i agree it is a good idea, as i had to go through the restriction period, but i'm under 21 but can now ride anything i want. there is one MAJOR flaw with the way the bikes are done and the way you propose to do the cars as well. ok so nothing over 100bhp till your over 25, so someone who has driven two years still has to be on a 1.4l yet they do 10, 000miles a year, yet any tom dick and harry who just do their test for the first time and are 26, can go out and buy/ drive anything they want, yet the "young" driver has more experience. That is where the flaw with the bikes comes in, if your over 21 you sit your DAS (direct access) and then can ride anything you want, with no restriction period. they say young drivers are the biggest risk, i remeber being at a bike talk with the head of the police bike section and he says the statistics are actually from around 25 to 40, as this is when people go "i'm not a young driver anymore" and they can get insured on anything they please. so yes i agree limit people to what they drive, but make it fair for everyone who passes and restrict everyone, or no one. There are some 19year olds who are more mature than 28year olds, and will drive sensibly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 oops i hadn't written it as clearly as i wanted, i put up to 25, but was thinknig about years of experience, i didn't go back and check it. i agree with what you say, that it should be done on experience not age. kind of tap it onto the current probation period of 2 years and limit the power to weight ratio at the same time. to be honest accidents will happen at any age but i do see alot of driving immaturity in my sixth formers. not saying it doesn't exist in older gernations, but we had a sixth former run over a year 7 student in the car park because he came in too fast round a blind corner, yet he would havew ahd to have passed the studentbefore hand so should have known he was coming. (funny one way junction/roundabout at the entrance to the car park) police were involved and he was eventually done on having bald tyres by the police as the school and parents didn't want to prosecute. my last school i watched a sixthformer come in to quick into a carpark in the wet, came to end of the car park, went to go round and instead just slid into the fence. this is why i have a specific parking space in a place in the carpark where it would be nearly impossible to hit by accident and it allows me to park away from cars so that people can't open a door into it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S1 HNK Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 i personally dont think what car they drive makes that much difference. In my experience the nicer the car the more they respect it and its often the really old bangers that get thrashed and then dont have the brakes to stop or any safety devices to help. Young people will always drive quick but whether they are in a 3 series or a 1.2 corsa i dont think it makes much difference. I just know which car i would want my child to driving if they did have an accident. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanS16 Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 i personally dont think what car they drive makes that much difference. In my experience the nicer the car the more they respect it and its often the really old bangers that get thrashed and then dont have the brakes to stop or any safety devices to help. +1 At the end of the day you can still get to 60mph in a banger on most roads, plus I have loads of mates who have crap cars who run on crap tyres and dont get it serviced untill something fails and they have to. I am a young driver and yes i admit I do occasionally exceed the speed limit on a nation speed limit road (dual carrigeway etc) but it think its the idiots who are always overtaking on 30mph single carriageway roads in residential areas that need to be (usually clio sport drivers) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Ok, at the risk of sounding like a broken record I'll say this EDUCATION The government need to educate ALL drivers better. Not pin point all accidents on your people. Educate youngsters but also educate older people too. This is what I'd like to see and would be easier to police than restrictions. I had a saxo VTR at 18 (after having a 1.2 Nova for a year) which was a pretty nippy car. I then bought a lexus IS at 20 (RWD 2.0 150bhp) and then the Zed at 23. Was I experienced? No. Am I dead? No. It's the person not the car that causes you to drive like a t0553r. The only accidents I've had. An old guy pulled out right in front of me 2 weeks after passing my test and my chrashtra got written off when it was parked.... I am for from perfect (or even good) at driving but I respect my car and what it will do. I also respect other road users so try not to drive like a total chump on the road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AK350Z Posted April 8, 2009 Author Share Posted April 8, 2009 i personally dont think what car they drive makes that much difference. In my experience the nicer the car the more they respect it and its often the really old bangers that get thrashed and then dont have the brakes to stop or any safety devices to help. +1 At the end of the day you can still get to 60mph in a banger on most roads, plus I have loads of mates who have crap cars who run on crap tyres and dont get it serviced untill something fails and they have to. I am a young driver and yes i admit I do occasionally exceed the speed limit on a nation speed limit road (dual carrigeway etc) but it think its the idiots who are always overtaking on 30mph single carriageway roads in residential areas that need to be (usually clio sport drivers) Indeed, i couldn't understant why the AA had to tack on the "Ooo, NOS is baaaad!" angle. As they weren't producing any kind of new stats or research, i can ony assume it was a cheap advertising shot to keep their name in peoples minds. Whats worse is that the BBC, funded by you and I don't forget, is basically just re-cycling a press release and not adding any real content to the debate! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattG Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 The AA seems to periodically issue these type of press releases. I think it's part of their marketing strategy now... Sometimes they have merit but a lot of the time it's nonsense like this. The BBC ceased to be a credible news outlet some time ago IMO. Inaccurate scare stories and biased reporting seem to be the norm for them these days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyinsurance Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 idots, what there refering to is not the modified scene, but young drivers. i agree that young drivers are the most dangerous on the road, (sorry young people )and young lads under 25 are most likely to have a crash. insurance companies already do this to a point by financially raping young people on big cars, and try and price you off your decision. prime example is one of my sixth formers just got a clio 182 and his insurance for 3rd party only is £2500. but his aprents apy for it as they have the money. You are contradicting yourself a bit there! You say that young drivers are the most dangerous but then you go on to say that it is 'rape' that one of your (assume 17 year old) student is paying £2500 to insurance a 182BHP renault Clio. If you could see the claims stats and payouts for 17 year olds, you would realise that the prices being charged for insurance are in line with the risks presented. Would YOU want to insure a 17 year old on a car like a Clio 182 which icidentally has one of the worst claims loss ratio out of all the cars on the road in the UK?? £2500 sounds like a cheap price to me! Ollie Sky Insurance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilTheForce Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 If there's one thing I've learned its that governments will do what's best for themselves not the public. Don't get me wrong they will be seen to overtly condemn reckless driving and powerful cars but young drivers get flashed by speed cameras = more money, get pulled by cops and fined = more money, pay more for road tax on performance cars = more money. Even the insane insurance premiums are contributing to the economy and are probably taxable from the companies. It's a little like smoking. The government condemn it, say it's a terrible health risk but then make over £9 billion a year from Tobacco revenue. Don't be fooled folks, they have to be seen to be doing something about it but while they can financially rape motorists little will change. Phew political rant over... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nixy Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Having spent a lot of time around young lads of a certain age (my son and his mates) I can see that for them it was mainly an issue of street cred, showing off and wanting to have the fastest car. I know for a fact that the ones who could afford to drive Type R's and other sporty cars would show off and also let their mates have a go to see what it was like. Out of all the lads my son grew up with he is the only one that never crashed his car at some point after his test and shall I tell you why? Because I was the only mean parent that made him pay for his own lessons, his own test, his own car and his own insurance in HIS OWN NAME. His mates all had their parents as main drivers on their cars and one even got points for speeding which his father took for him! My son knew exactly what it would cost him if he crashed his car and was therefore a lot more careful. It meant nothing to the others who just got bailed out by their parents time and time again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 My parents bought my first car and paid for the insurance...... I did hand them back nearly 50% of the cash they gave me for the car though. Believe me I knew if went home and told them I'd smashed my car I'd have been very unpopular. I have too much respect for my parents to make an arse of them. Nice insight into the insurance though.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilTheForce Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Having spent a lot of time around young lads of a certain age (my son and his mates) I can see that for them it was mainly an issue of street cred, showing off and wanting to have the fastest car. I know for a fact that the ones who could afford to drive Type R's and other sporty cars would show off and also let their mates have a go to see what it was like. Out of all the lads my son grew up with he is the only one that never crashed his car at some point after his test and shall I tell you why? Because I was the only mean parent that made him pay for his own lessons, his own test, his own car and his own insurance in HIS OWN NAME. His mates all had their parents as main drivers on their cars and one even got points for speeding which his father took for him! My son knew exactly what it would cost him if he crashed his car and was therefore a lot more careful. It meant nothing to the others who just got bailed out by their parents time and time again. Good for you Nixy! My folks did the same to me back in the day, I had to pay my own way and it gives you a real sense of money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nixy Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 I'm not saying that kids are likely to get into trouble if their parents pay for stuff - Stew you obviously had kind folks but they still taught you the value of things. I lent my son the money for his first moped but he got a saturday job and paid me back every month with every penny he earned - when he paid half of it I let him off the rest but he never knew or expected I would do that. Its the kids that know the price of everything and the value of nothing that have the problems. Easy come easy go. My step daughter got given everything she ever stamped her foot for and turned out to be a total materialistic brat that got into all sorts of trouble with drugs etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Ok this debate has gone a little further then the issue at hand. My thoughts on this are that there should be more driver training. It all comes down to competency. To the person who said "under 25s should be a 100 horsepower" is utter crap. Would that apply to Lewis Hamilton also who is 24? I'm under 25 but I will bet my bottom dollar that I am a better driver then MANY people twice my age with BUNDLES more experience then me. How do I know that? Because I'm used to driving fast at track days, go-karting weekly as a kid, being a petrolhead generally, etc... others are used to poddling along below 30mph all the time and have been doing so for 40 years! I also don't like the way nitrous has been singled out in the BBC video. My car is probably one of the only 350z's in the world that has that particular WON kit on it... and I know that NOT having power on tap all the time reduces the number of times I have that extra power, hence will definately not use it as much. Not to mention paying £60 every time I want to fill the bottle... I mean, people that do this stuff aren't stupid!. Modding costs money! Nitrous is a CONTINUAL cost! And if Mr.AA realised how deep a 17 year olds pockets would have to be in order to add 200bhp to pretty much ANY car then he would perhaps think twice... Not to say he doesn't and is just being a deliberate tw*t??! As a result, this hasn't gone down too well on the WON forum (run by the person in the video): http://forum.nitrous-advice.org/viewtop ... f=6&t=4320 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nixy Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 I agree with the experience over age comment. Maybe the driving test should be based on driving hours (bit like a pilot) rather than letting someone with bags of confidence pass their test after a handful of lessons and then be loose on the road? Don't think there'll ever by a 'right or wrong' answer to this one but the current system isn't up to much either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilTheForce Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Nitrous is an easy target because it's A: Misunderstood and B:In films and TV (and we know how people like to blame the media for everything) Reality is less The Fast and Furious and more The Slow and Infuriating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobby Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 AA trying their marketing trick...make a statement about something or the other and get on national tv with some sort of safety crap! Only problem here is that majority of TV viewers have no clue about cars and speed etc...so if AA man says something on TV, then he must be right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 idots, what there refering to is not the modified scene, but young drivers. i agree that young drivers are the most dangerous on the road, (sorry young people )and young lads under 25 are most likely to have a crash. insurance companies already do this to a point by financially raping young people on big cars, and try and price you off your decision. prime example is one of my sixth formers just got a clio 182 and his insurance for 3rd party only is £2500. but his aprents apy for it as they have the money. You are contradicting yourself a bit there! You say that young drivers are the most dangerous but then you go on to say that it is 'rape' that one of your (assume 17 year old) student is paying £2500 to insurance a 182BHP renault Clio. If you could see the claims stats and payouts for 17 year olds, you would realise that the prices being charged for insurance are in line with the risks presented. Would YOU want to insure a 17 year old on a car like a Clio 182 which icidentally has one of the worst claims loss ratio out of all the cars on the road in the UK?? £2500 sounds like a cheap price to me Ollie Sky Insurance i don't see it as a contradiction, i think its very sensible to price young people according to the likely hood of them crashing, i used the term rape, as its what he said when he told me how much his insurance cost. his exact words " have been rapred on the insurance and have to pay £2500" if he or his parents are silly enough to pay that then more fool them. i try an encourage the young lads when they come up for getting cars that they should keep it under 1.4, and get some thing fun like an old mini. sorry if it seemed like i was contradicting myself i was trying to promote the fact that the insurance companies are already helping in deterring young drives from powerful cars by chargijng high prices for them or as you say appropriatly charged according to risk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z-man Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 This is all pure BS. The number of kids with NOS is really small and most would not now how to set it up properly. So it's BANG, oh dear what's happened? It's just another insurance company excuse to do us all over, young and old! Yes, young drivers are more likely to crash and their insurance premiums should reflect this but highlighting NOS is a red herring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muddy Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7989110.stm I don't get the connection. The proportion of "boy racers" carrying NOS must be tiny, and the subset of them causing an accident even more so! Why not go after Wee Neds with bald or cheap tyres that double the braking distance! Yep, been subjected to hearing this on Radio one's newsbeat all day. It really did get me wuite angry. Agree with most comments above. Most of the time it's the driver at fault and not the car. The car doesn't do 70mph on it's own in a 30mph limit it's the driver that does that!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AK350Z Posted April 8, 2009 Author Share Posted April 8, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7989110.stm I don't get the connection. The proportion of "boy racers" carrying NOS must be tiny, and the subset of them causing an accident even more so! Why not go after Wee Neds with bald or cheap tyres that double the braking distance! Yep, been subjected to hearing this on Radio one's newsbeat all day. It really did get me wuite angry. Agree with most comments above. Most of the time it's the driver at fault and not the car. The car doesn't do 70mph on it's own in a 30mph limit it's the driver that does that!!!! Yeah, i was also listening to R1 all day, it was bloody infuriating how the interviews (Of people who had been in crashes etc) had absolutely nothing to do with the headline! Your son was hurt/died in a crash did he? Did he have NOS fitted? NO! Was he ragging his Halfords ramraid Fiesta around a 30 limit at 70? YES! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.