I didn't watch it. Thought it might be a bit near the knuckle.
All drivers under 40 who have not passed the IAM test should carry a huge red P (for prat) on the back of their vehicle, as should all those convicted of a wide variety of driving offences unfortunately not yet on the statute books.
There should be no upper age limit for drivers provided they can see and hear and are not totally gaga.
|
All drivers under 40 who have not passed the IAM test should carry a huge red P (for prat) on the back of their vehicle, as should all those convicted of a wide variety of driving offences unfortunately not yet on the statute books.
All drivers over 60 should have to pass a reaction-time test. And they should also revise their knowledge of speed limits. 60mph zone, in nice dry conditions means you should be going faster than 40mph. Another test would be the "getting out of a parking bay without burning out the clutch" test.
IMO, the IAM test is worthless - the last piece of useless advice I remember hearing from IAM was to stay in 3rd whilst doing 30. I think I'm a good enough driver to select my gears myself, I find 4th is usually better personally! ;-)
|
|
17 year old in a Ford Fiesta 1.25, fully comp insurance = £1.5k, 73 year old in a 2.0 Mondeo, fully comp insurance = £250. Both low risk postcodes. This proves that older drivers are safer drivers, the insurers are never wrong ;-)
|
|
This programme last night did indicate that insurance for over 70's is now difficult if nigh-on impossible to get....not sure what stats are available.
|
"> This programme last night did indicate that insurance for over 70's is now difficult if nigh-on impossible to get....<"
It was on TV so it must be true then ...
|
Phew, thats alright then-I'd hate to spout these comments if they weren't true!
Lies, damned lies, and statistics......someone once said.....
|
|
|
|
This programme last night did indicate that insurance for over 70's is now difficult if nigh-on impossible to get....not sure what stats are available.
>
Absolute rubbish.My parents both still drive at the ages of 74 and 85.They have no problem getting insurance.My mother(85) learnt to drive during the war on an army jeep.she has never had an accident.My father has had three accidents(2 non fault)in fifty years of driving,all were when he was in his fifties commuting 40k miles a year.I reckon they would pass a re-test better than me.But must agree with some of the other comments about the drivers shown in the programme.
|
|
|
|
|
I think all drivers of all ages should be banned in the name of safety.
V
|
|
|
IMO, the IAM test is worthless - the last piece of useless advice I remember hearing from IAM was to stay in 3rd whilst doing 30.
Aprilia likes people to drive about in the lower gears I notice. Anyway he complains about people trying to drive at 30 in top gear, which most cars will do comfortably on the right terrain (flat or slightly downhill) provided the driver has a sensitive foot and ear.
One of the offences drivers should be penalised for is driving at 50 on open but narrow A-roads, because their speedo says 57 and they are playing safe. Anyone who drives much under a speedometer 70 on such roads should be pulled and scolded, and if they are under 40 banned from driving for two weeks to concentrate their minds.
|
What is this rubbish about people not drving at the speed limit? The limit is the speed you should not exceed, not the speed you must drive at.
I dont drive at the speed limit because I drive an old car and it doesnt have the abilities of the latest cars and its 20 years old. I do about 45 on a 60 unless its long and straight and about 60-65 on duel carriageways. I usually edge up to 70 on the motorway.
Theres always the option to overtake for people who wish to drive faster and Ive found that if you drive at about 40 on a 60, it gives drivers behind many more opportunities to pass than by doing 50.
This attitude that one must drive as fast as possible is the attitude that gets 17 year olds wrapping their Novas round trees. Highly irresponsible.
|
This attitude that one must drive as fast as possible is the attitude that gets 17 year olds wrapping their Novas round trees. Highly irresponsible.
Didn't notice yr very reasonable post before stunorthants. Slow but considerate drivers are no problem to anyone. But one category that gets my goat is the person who slows to 40 for the twisty bits when higher speeds are safe but overtaking needs a Lotus or something, then starts to accelerate when it is at last possible to overtake. And other moving-obstacle stuff.
It is many years since I have tried to drive 'as fast as possible' as a matter of course! Bad for cars and wearing on the nerves.
However plenty of high-mileage Euro and Asioboxes can swim along at motorway speeds and better. There's nothing irresposible about wanting to do the thing quickly and safely. Indeed it is good for the soul.
|
|
|
|
What gear at what speed depends on the car.... my 6 speed is happier at lower speeds in 4th than my old 5 speed, as you'd expect.
I would hope that the IAM are not quite so rigidly prescriptive.
I think the old bloke with the Roller was a nutter! Even his wife asked him at one point what on earth he was talking about, to which he replied he didn't remember anything he'd said for longer than a minute and a half.
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately , most of the featured drivers never took a driving test because they were driving before the test was brought in.
I remember being concerned over my ( now deceased ) father in law who, although not gaga wrote off two cars in the space of a year when in his late seventies and suggesting gently after the second accident where he fell asleep and drove straight over a roundabot that he take a long hard look at whether he should be driving before he possibly killed someone.
He eventually returned to driving but his last car , a BX Turbo bore the scars of many a minor scrape caused by lack of judgement in car parks etc.
|
|
|
There should be no upper age limit for drivers provided they can see and hear and are not totally gaga.
>>
I see some elderly drivers around that struggle to meet just one of those criteria.
|
>>This proves that older drivers are safer drivers, the insurers are never wrong ;-)>>
Ask a friendly septegenarian to hire a car, they might have trouble.
|
>>This proves that older drivers are safer drivers, the insurers are never wrong ;-)>> Ask a friendly septegenarian to hire a car, they might have trouble.
Funny you should say that. I have just enquired about hiring a car and out of interest I entered gradually increasing ages. It wasn't until I got to 101 years of age that the company said that there would be a special rate.
|
|
|
|
I see some elderly drivers around that struggle to meet just one of those criteria.
I'll second that. Flat caps are the biggest clue in my experience. Also, the old dears who drive with their chest against the steering wheel, I've never quite understood that.
|
I'll second that. Flat caps are the biggest clue in my experience.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
really?
|
I believe there is one old blighter around here who is good for a ton and a half, and I hope we do not get rid of him for a year or two yet!
|
|
|
Truly eye-opening although I should be well aware of the potential in my town, a resort in which the vast majority of the population has been collecting the State Pension for years and years.
Fortunatley they don't have to drive to the Post Office now to collect it - it goes straight into their bank accounts.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
I have met several 90+ drivers during my working life, the majority of whom were more astute than many 70 year olds.
When I demonstrated Scooters, to women especially , I always asked if they'd ever driven and never allowed them an 8 mph machine if they hadn't
What I do think needs restricting is an upper age learning limit - it's easier to learn things as young as possible so no one over 40 should be starting to learn to drive
|
All this talk of restrictions here and there based on age is a bit daft IMO.
You can't generalise that all over 70s have lost it and become dangerous, nor can you say (even tongue in cheek) that over 40s are too old to learn.
Clearly nonsense. Either you're good enough to drive at point x in your life or you're not. The existing driving test can filter out over 40s that can't learn anymore as well as 17 yo's who never will. All we need now is a fair and reasonable method to test over 70s at regular intervals to weed out those that can no longer drive safely and let the rest of the elder population keep their much valued mobility.
|
|
|
|
Fortunatley they don't have to drive to the Post Office now to collect it - it goes straight into their bank accounts.
Having been brought up in Christchurch (Dorset) before moving to the North-East, I understand exactly what you mean. The local paper regularly reported accidents as a result of elderly drivers. One I remember, an elderly lady in her 90s, forgot which pedal was which in her automatic Daihatsu, and smashed into a wall. Thankfully the other motorists on the road were alert enough to get out of her way.
I realise I'm biased, being a younger driver and having only 4 years experience behind the wheel, but I really do believe elderly drivers pose much more of a hazard than younger drivers. While younger drivers lack experience and make mistakes which write off their cars, and hence raise their premiums, they still have a concentration span. I frequently see elderly drivers concentrating intensely on the road ahead, but still only managing 35mph on a rural A-road. I recently read an article in which an ambulance driver voiced his frustration that elderly people were seldom noticed a massive Iveco van with flashing blue lights on their tail. Only yesterday my girlfriend overtook an old dear who was driving along a major dual carriageway, with both wing mirrors folded in. That's a little more dangerous than going 100mph up the M1 in a souped-up Citroen Saxo.
|
Isn't Chritstchurch a popular retirement location? Hence a larger proportion of drivers are older, and it should come as no surprise that when there are accidents, it is often old people involved. You could equally pick any town with a much younger population, and find, unsurprisingly that all the accidents involve young people instead. It doesn't prove anything, not does the anecdotes about folded wing mirrors etc. I've seen bad driving and poor awareness from all sections of the population, it doesn't stop at old people.
Indeed, some of the real lunatics have already killed themselves (Darwin style) whilst still young and therefore never get to be old drivers, leaving a pool of better drivers behind! ;)
|
|
|
|
|
I'll second that. Flat caps are the biggest clue in my experience. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> really?
Surely you don't wear one om?
Very few hats are anything but grotesque and embarrassing. Baseball caps.... yucksville!
|
Further to some of the posts here, wearing my whippersnapper's hat, I have come across some fairly terrifying, very slow, elderly drivers, who had indeed first got their licences before a test was part of the process (it stayed like that in Ireland until the sixties). One of them, a late aunt of my wife, also used to set my teeth on edge by revving the guts out of her horrid little Fiesta to warm it up from cold. I regularly explained to her that this was very bad for the car, and she would seem to understand, but the next morning the screaming of tortured Ford machinery would roll through the Sussex mist as usual.
I much preferred my cousin's grandfather, a retired army officer living in Ascot in the fifties. He had a pre-Rover 75 Rover Sixteen which he drove everywhere at 50mph; a small man, he could hardly see over the scuttle but nevertheless hurtled cheerfully about with generous swings of the wheel... never hit anything as far as I know.
|
|
IMO all drivers should be re-tested every 5 years, starting at 17!
|
I saw the Onelife programme last night - funniest thing I've seen for some time.
Not sure what is scarier - a 90 year old with (or without) a walking stick or a 19 year old chav out to impress.
_______
IanS
|
|
|
IMO all drivers should be re-tested every 5 years, starting at 17!
Agree 100%. All this talk of retesting 70-pluses etc is ageist.
As I've said on many occasions, a good driver will not fear such a test.
BUT I think that the "retest" should not be a traditional driving test. It should simply consist of examiner getting into your car, saying "right, today I want you to drive to town x 20 miles down the road and back again" and let the driver get on with it.
The driver has already proven he can do the manouvres etc, this would be more real world -- and drivers with dangerous bad habits would be filtered out, regardless of age.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
