if youre talking about gps speed sensoring - then yes. but this "complicated measuring device" is laser operated with a lot of sensors fitted around the car measuring the relative speed of the vehicle as a whole based on the ground around it. so no - it is not really in our phones and logically its impossible for it to be without extra peripherals
It's the art to stop faster than your car while you're in it, farting in the direction of the obstruction doesn't help, but it spices up the experience ;)
Of course, speed never killed anyone. That's why our Autobahns are by far the safest roads in Germany. You must just ensure that nobody stops too quickly in case of an accident - e.g. due to massive crash barriers to separate oncoming traffic. So even if you have a puncture at 150mph and you loose control, it takes a while and several hundred feet to stop, but nothing serious happens, because everything is aligned with all other traffic. It's a shame that more than 80% of the Autobahn kilometers have speed limits today, regardless of safety.
It is not the speed... it is when you react and how you react. You can kill just by driving someone over going 25 mph and texting... or stop in time from 45 mph.
Wow, 70 mph speed limit in the UK? Is that everywhere? Here in Australia we're stuck at 62 mph (100 km/h) on the freeways. :( Kind of absurd considering the vast distances we have compared to the UK.
+CheesyTV Here in the Netherlands we have 80mph on a lot of highways and they are planning to raise up the rest of the 74mph one's too. Germany for example has practicly 80mph on the entire autobahn as standard, and the one's that don't have a speed sign next to the road means you have no speed limit at all!.
+RavenPrecept Not the case. The 62 mph limit applies to all freeways in built-up areas. These freeways are typically 4 lanes in each direction. Also, you mention that in the UK motorists typically drive 80 mph in 70 zones. Don't you have speed cameras there??
Increasing the speed limit might not increase the througput of the road, because the safe distance between cars increases quadratically with speed. Over a certain speed the increase in this distance means less cars can pass through an arbitrary point on the road in a given amount of time.
While the car is more performant, the person behind the wheel doesn't have better reflexes. As such, going 20 mph faster would mean that much less time to react in case of emergency.
In my experience there are occasions in everyday driving where a fast car is advantageous. The easiest example is a short, slow highway entrance ramp where you have to floor it in some cars just to get up to speed in time.
The only justification for the "Speed Kills" lobby is because of some asshats who think they can drive like Colin McRae down public roads - blasting down as fast as possible and not even thinking of lifting or using the brakes.
I blame the driving test for not legitimately teaching people to drive fast and instead focusing on menial stuff like thread a steering wheel. Think how much safer our roads would be if they taught stuff like surface awareness and the proper way to take corners at speed or decelerate/accident avoidance.
One of the best things Clarkson has ever said is "You don't realize how important brakes are until you're in an American car and you haven't really got them" True, this. It isn't just the terrible fuel economy that makes American cars crappy, after all.
On principle, I agree with Clarkson's argument that everyone would be safer driving at 200 miles an hour because you'd have to concentrate on your driving more. And that would work, if everyone was sensible and drove properly. Unfortunately, in the real world, where we all live, lots of people are not sensible and do not drive properly, so you'd get some dingbat driving at 200 miles an hour while checking their Facebook status. The resultant crash would be a massacre. So that's why we have the limit. Crash at 50-70, you might survive. Crash at much more than a hundred and you definitely won't.
judgedredd49 Are you completely misunderstanding my argument and making me look ridiculous by adding loads of question marks for no reason?????????????????????
Maybe if so sorry mate. I have taken the ???? off. Had no intentions of ridiculing you. If you feel that way sorry it was not my intention but Clarkson and his Hubris just get my goat. Nothing he says should be accepted as truthful. Its all created for effect.
judgedredd49 Not a problem! Incidentally, I did mean that driving at 200 miles an hour on the roads was sensible - in theory. The point I was making was that it isn't sensible in practice.
Theory as you say is alright but in practise as you further say it is subjective. I still dont think many would agree with you on the subject. even in theory. but thats for others to agree or not.
Somehow I managed over 40 mph on a “clover leaf” bend that was at 25 mph and it went round albeit leaning quite a lot but there was no tire squeal and the tires are about a year old. Mine stops in 140 ft.
I learned to drive in an old half ton pickup, sometimes having to slam on the brakes. After I bought my first car, a civic which weighed half as much, an oncoming car crossed the highway median into my lane and I panic braked. The car, with abs, stopped so hard it scared me as much as almost hitting the other car. The truck could have been a head on wreck.
244 ft back then, now its 315 ft according to the current Highway Code. www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/answers/what-is-the-stopping-and-braking-distance-of-a-car
I miss small hatchbacks. Those little bastards were magic. Now, most of them have four doors, and compensate heavily in either storage space or outright size.
The problem I see with the low speed limit is that if the speed limit is low, car companies wouldn't bother with making the cars safer than they are now because it is deemed 'unnecessary'. If the speed limit were to be increased, companies would work more on making cars safer than they currently are.
That’s partially true. There are speeds at which the reaction time of the driver would be so crucial that a minimal distraction could have very serious consequences. Also, the chance or dying in a crash will nose up above 40mph, regardless of the car safety, because or the high decelerations sustained by the passengers. We should remember that the road is used by everyone and frequently, so it should not require as much focus as a race track, because there are too many variables, not to mention that fuel consumption will increase a lot, and so car wear and weight for newer models. It isn’t really worth it… EXCEPT for highways… I like the Autobahn system. Fuel consumption aside, increasing speed limits in highways could make sense because there are much less variables than other roads and people often break the limits anyways. By the way… they should stop producing those crap-handling SUV’s and stop more people using their cellphone while driving
Wouldn't the Ford Anglia still be able to stop slightly better than when it was new because they would have been using the brakes and tyres available to them at the time which I presume would be slightly better than what was originally fitted to the vehicle.
shove some Michelin Pilot Sports on it, and some decent disc brakes...it'll stop a lot better than the cheese spread drum brakes and rubber band tyres from the 60's lol.
The drum brakes fitted to a 105e Anglia are tiny, no matter what shoes were fitted they were always terrible and when matched with really soft suspension made for rough/cobbled they made for a dangerous combination when stopping from top speed even in the dry
What’s missing from all this is the human reaction factor. It takes about one second for you to figure out that you’re in trouble and need to brake. At 100 km/h, that’s about an extra 28m, which is a substantial fraction to add to all these stopping distances. And then don’t forget the kinetic energy when you hit something--that goes up as the square of the speed. And what about in the wet? That can easily double your stopping distance.
Got an old soapbox racer in the garage with more crash protection.lol Had a Citroen Saxo car rear end my Passat a few years back, my tow bar virtually caved the front of his car in, what a muppet.
What show is this from? It's pretty awesome. BTW: If you've got a Kindle, check out "Great Formulas Explained" by Bektas. It's got a nice popular science explanation on braking distance and how to calculate it.
@judgedredd49 in both NL and Germany it's 3kph or 3% rounded up, whichever is more. And that correction is only applied after the fact. Going 136 in a 130 zone, can get you pulled over. The cops probably won't care, but if you happen to cross paths with officer Grouchy McBadDay, you're looking at a €60 fine.
We should have speed limits based on the age of the vehicle. Anything with its year on its licence plate (i.e. from 2001 I think?) should have higher limits. Everything older should remain at the current limits. Honestly, I was driving today in the rain and even then some of the 30 mph zones feel ridiculous.
Very intresting - didn't know ether that the braking distances and "max speed in curves" did vary so much between cars. Did someone know what's the radius of the turning circle in the test? But - the arguments for the low speed limits is even more rediculous than the difference between cars. Here in Sweden, we have the same low speed limits and is still allowed to go 110 km/h during the winter, when it's snow and ice on the roads - wich means the braking distance may easely increase 5 times or more. The braking distance may be longer from 110 km/h than from 200 km/h on dry roads. If the speed limits where related to the stopping distance we would have to go max 50-60 km/h during winter, but almost anyone does at least 90 or 100 km/h on roads with 110 km/h speed limit (except for when it's really bad weather conditions). Still - people killed on the roads is not much higher during the winter than the rest of the year...
Simply put, a car engineered to go 150 mph is safer at any speed than one only engineered to go 70 mph.
"We fitted a complicated measuring device to the side of our Anglia" - which is now fitted to everyone's smart phones.
Technology rocks :)
ald good times 1990
if youre talking about gps speed sensoring - then yes. but this "complicated measuring device" is laser operated with a lot of sensors fitted around the car measuring the relative speed of the vehicle as a whole based on the ground around it. so no - it is not really in our phones and logically its impossible for it to be without extra peripherals
¿? No, it's not.
@@armkenz you could make an argument that lidar sensors in recent phones could achieve that same thing
Was actually 85ft more than the Lexus
Haha, looked for this.
Freddy so did I
Speed has never killed anyone, suddenly becoming stationary… that's what gets you.
ivanovsd Anyone who's been hit by a truck going 60+ mph would beg to differ.
David van Wyhe to sum it up: brutal acceleration/negative acceleration is the cause, so you're both right
It's the art to stop faster than your car while you're in it, farting in the direction of the obstruction doesn't help, but it spices up the experience ;)
Of course, speed never killed anyone. That's why our Autobahns are by far the safest roads in Germany. You must just ensure that nobody stops too quickly in case of an accident - e.g. due to massive crash barriers to separate oncoming traffic. So even if you have a puncture at 150mph and you loose control, it takes a while and several hundred feet to stop, but nothing serious happens, because everything is aligned with all other traffic. It's a shame that more than 80% of the Autobahn kilometers have speed limits today, regardless of safety.
It is not the speed... it is when you react and how you react. You can kill just by driving someone over going 25 mph and texting... or stop in time from 45 mph.
The "garden roller" 911 wheel is about the size of wheels on most regular cars today.
This was a time when people on TV liked to boast about the 'complicated computer devices' they used to measure things with
How did I end up watching this when I'm revising for my theory test tomorrow... That's procrastination at its peak
Isobella Austin the question is, did you pass?
***** passed first time! Then I did my practical in February 2016 and passed that first time too!!
Isobella Austin congratulations :)
MoJawidG56 thankyou so much!!
Me too, on monday! procrastination :))) always.
before Peugeot fired the Chef du Suspension and started making orrible cars.
love this comment.
Avec l'interieur fabrique, spit et kleenex.
SPIT ET KLEENEX WI WI WI
Annd e went to furd
Salute la voiture 'orrible
speed doesn't kill.inattentive drivers kill.
michael evans Totally Agree
totally agree also !!! I always laugh when you hear someone say that a car came out of no where and hit me haa haaa
He's right of course. Jumping off a 20-story building is fine for the first 19 stories - it's just that sudden stop afterwards that hurts.
Wow, 70 mph speed limit in the UK? Is that everywhere? Here in Australia we're stuck at 62 mph (100 km/h) on the freeways. :( Kind of absurd considering the vast distances we have compared to the UK.
+CheesyTV Here in the Netherlands we have 80mph on a lot of highways and they are planning to raise up the rest of the 74mph one's too. Germany for example has practicly 80mph on the entire autobahn as standard, and the one's that don't have a speed sign next to the road means you have no speed limit at all!.
+Ian Greenhalgh, that's a bummer, imagine if that wouldn't have happened, then maybe we wouldn't have speedlimits or camera's at all EVERYWHERE!
+CheesyTV That's absurd. It's 90 miles an hour in Poland.
***** I don't know if we have dual carriage ways here. What is that? How is it different to a freeway (motorway)?
+RavenPrecept Not the case. The 62 mph limit applies to all freeways in built-up areas. These freeways are typically 4 lanes in each direction. Also, you mention that in the UK motorists typically drive 80 mph in 70 zones. Don't you have speed cameras there??
I love how the cone knocked the light off the front of the Puegot... real quality there!
It's just a boss cone
Clarkson admiring a Peugeot?...... Man this clip IS really old..
He actually do admire the x05 and x06 Peugeot.
Looks familiar - oh yes, the same story was covered recently in series 22 of Top Gear!
GonzaJ01 A revisit - but then, decades later, it's STILL TRUE!
Increasing the speed limit might not increase the througput of the road, because the safe distance between cars increases quadratically with speed. Over a certain speed the increase in this distance means less cars can pass through an arbitrary point on the road in a given amount of time.
1985 RX 7 FB had already vented disc brakes- front and rear ! My 1988 Turbo has it too- and 4 pots front from the factory .
While the car is more performant, the person behind the wheel doesn't have better reflexes. As such, going 20 mph faster would mean that much less time to react in case of emergency.
In my experience there are occasions in everyday driving where a fast car is advantageous. The easiest example is a short, slow highway entrance ramp where you have to floor it in some cars just to get up to speed in time.
Back when Peugeot was respectable and you NEEDED to be an idiot to crash it.
or to abuse it
The only justification for the "Speed Kills" lobby is because of some asshats who think they can drive like Colin McRae down public roads - blasting down as fast as possible and not even thinking of lifting or using the brakes.
Ironic given McRae's mantra was "if in doubt, flat out". Mind you, that guy was a legend and, as with Richard Burns, a huge loss to the sport.
I blame the driving test for not legitimately teaching people to drive fast and instead focusing on menial stuff like thread a steering wheel. Think how much safer our roads would be if they taught stuff like surface awareness and the proper way to take corners at speed or decelerate/accident avoidance.
This is very true, the new koenigsegg one:1 will stop from 250 mph -0 in 10 seconds
And 70-0 in 28 metres!
Stopping from 70 mph (31.3 m/s) in 28 metres is an average deceleration 17.5 m/s^2, AKA 1.8G
and then to think that F1 cars can pull over 5G at breaking...
Moss Did you see their new car?
" 250 mph -0 in 10 seconds" yes and the pedestrian will be dead in 1-2 seconds... then this 9-8 seconds left gonna feel not so "fast".
Evi1M4chine enough to make that winking smile face permanent haha
85 feet Jeremy, 85 !!
One of the best things Clarkson has ever said is "You don't realize how important brakes are until you're in an American car and you haven't really got them"
True, this. It isn't just the terrible fuel economy that makes American cars crappy, after all.
Love the angle of the car at full lock around a corner. Jeremy was lucky he didn't fall through the passenger door.
Jeremy reccomending a peugeot. How times have changed.
Maniac.
@@IndiBrony Yobo
WOW blast from the past
“Speed has never killed anyone. Suddenly becoming stationary, that's what gets you.”
― Jeremy Clarkson
Havent seen this one before Thank you sir !
Very prophetic Jeremy.
"Speed never kills , Suddenly becoming stationary thats what gets u" - Jeremy Clarkson
Spot on mate!
fantastic test like ususal ,thanks jeremy clarkson
love that anglia.
This is great content
On principle, I agree with Clarkson's argument that everyone would be safer driving at 200 miles an hour because you'd have to concentrate on your driving more. And that would work, if everyone was sensible and drove properly. Unfortunately, in the real world, where we all live, lots of people are not sensible and do not drive properly, so you'd get some dingbat driving at 200 miles an hour while checking their Facebook status. The resultant crash would be a massacre.
So that's why we have the limit. Crash at 50-70, you might survive. Crash at much more than a hundred and you definitely won't.
You do mean on a race track dont you
Are you saying that driving on our roads at 200 mph is sensible
Are you from the same planet as Clarkson.
judgedredd49 Are you completely misunderstanding my argument and making me look ridiculous by adding loads of question marks for no reason?????????????????????
Maybe if so sorry mate. I have taken the ???? off.
Had no intentions of ridiculing you. If you feel that way sorry it was not my intention but Clarkson and his Hubris just get my goat. Nothing he says should be accepted as truthful. Its all created for effect.
judgedredd49 Not a problem!
Incidentally, I did mean that driving at 200 miles an hour on the roads was sensible - in theory. The point I was making was that it isn't sensible in practice.
Theory as you say is alright but in practise as you further say it is subjective. I still dont think many would agree with you on the subject. even in theory. but thats for others to agree or not.
brilliant
Somehow I managed over 40 mph on a “clover leaf” bend that was at 25 mph and it went round albeit leaning quite a lot but there was no tire squeal and the tires are about a year old. Mine stops in 140 ft.
That was some brave camera work right near the end there.
i just found out that Clarkson is probably the only english person, who can pronounce porsche the right way.
And, hilariously, the Toyota Prius (pri-us rather than pree-us)
6:36 - MANIAC!!!
All of this technical goodness means nothing when theres a blind 80 year old behind the wheel
Or their peripheral vision is shot to hell owing to age.
that wow though
That's one hell of an anorak
"Back to the twentieth century" whew 😩😅 those cars were all so drab though
Still absolutely relevant.
This guy is gonna go far
I love how the ford Anglias of the 60s look like they have a big mustache
How long would it take to get from London to Milton Keynes doing a constantly reset 0-60 in a Porsche GT3 RS with an alcantara wind screen.???
I learned to drive in an old half ton pickup, sometimes having to slam on the brakes. After I bought my first car, a civic which weighed half as much, an oncoming car crossed the highway median into my lane and I panic braked. The car, with abs, stopped so hard it scared me as much as almost hitting the other car. The truck could have been a head on wreck.
That man's a prophet.
What an intelligent man!
What episode was this?
244 ft back then, now its 315 ft according to the current Highway Code. www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/answers/what-is-the-stopping-and-braking-distance-of-a-car
That jacket is swag
even as old as this is, it's still better than nowadays TG.
Oh no, mate. Today's TG is not too bad.
TGT? I'm rather bored watching that.
I miss small hatchbacks. Those little bastards were magic. Now, most of them have four doors, and compensate heavily in either storage space or outright size.
The problem I see with the low speed limit is that if the speed limit is low, car companies wouldn't bother with making the cars safer than they are now because it is deemed 'unnecessary'. If the speed limit were to be increased, companies would work more on making cars safer than they currently are.
That’s partially true. There are speeds at which the reaction time of the driver would be so crucial that a minimal distraction could have very serious consequences. Also, the chance or dying in a crash will nose up above 40mph, regardless of the car safety, because or the high decelerations sustained by the passengers.
We should remember that the road is used by everyone and frequently, so it should not require as much focus as a race track, because there are too many variables, not to mention that fuel consumption will increase a lot, and so car wear and weight for newer models. It isn’t really worth it… EXCEPT for highways… I like the Autobahn system. Fuel consumption aside, increasing speed limits in highways could make sense because there are much less variables than other roads and people often break the limits anyways. By the way… they should stop producing those crap-handling SUV’s and stop more people using their cellphone while driving
Jeremy for transport minister !!!
Ahh, Longcross test facility. I thought that looked familiar. :D
wow. never thought id see a video with him liking a proche
Iirc, the logner distance in the highway code might be accounting for reaction time.
Or the 86% of drivers who drive shitty old vans and Land Rovers
The ORIGINAL Top Gear.
witch year is this ep from?
anyone remember the song they used for the ford Anglias achieve film or whatever
damn Peugeot 106 was 13k. Even something new as that similar performance nowadays would be under 5k used. This car can be found under 500 quid now
Any idea of the equivalent price to performance ratio for someone living in America? Mitsubishi?
Find me a 106 GTi for under 500 quid, not a fucking chance
The Highway Code breaking distance measurements account for driver error and reaction time
in his halfords jacket lol!!
Wouldn't the Ford Anglia still be able to stop slightly better than when it was new because they would have been using the brakes and tyres available to them at the time which I presume would be slightly better than what was originally fitted to the vehicle.
shove some Michelin Pilot Sports on it, and some decent disc brakes...it'll stop a lot better than the cheese spread drum brakes and rubber band tyres from the 60's lol.
The drum brakes fitted to a 105e Anglia are tiny, no matter what shoes were fitted they were always terrible and when matched with really soft suspension made for rough/cobbled they made for a dangerous combination when stopping from top speed even in the dry
Drum brakes and asbestos brake shoes fitted to very heavy steel-belted tires? Better?
When was that?
What’s missing from all this is the human reaction factor. It takes about one second for you to figure out that you’re in trouble and need to brake. At 100 km/h, that’s about an extra 28m, which is a substantial fraction to add to all these stopping distances.
And then don’t forget the kinetic energy when you hit something--that goes up as the square of the speed.
And what about in the wet? That can easily double your stopping distance.
The 106 may be good at avoiding a crash....but it also folds like house of cards if you DO hit something!
Got an old soapbox racer in the garage with more crash protection.lol Had a Citroen Saxo car rear end my Passat a few years back, my tow bar virtually caved the front of his car in, what a muppet.
@@ynotnilknarf39 Hitting any car from the back results in more damage to the front of the hitting car. Especially since it has a tow bar ...
When the ford was breaking it was like a bond film
What show is this from? It's pretty awesome. BTW: If you've got a Kindle, check out "Great Formulas Explained" by Bektas. It's got a nice popular science explanation on braking distance and how to calculate it.
It's an early Top Gear - before the reimagining!
what this from ?
My Cayenne Turbo did the 60-0 test in 116 ft on the track
Hard to believe that good braking distances now are below 100 ft.
this was the 90s as well
1000 years ago... was this
inventor of consumer advice
Ah good ol Top Gear.
126 mph was fast back then and nowadays 140 mph is standard and 200 mph is fast
@judgedredd49 in both NL and Germany it's 3kph or 3% rounded up, whichever is more. And that correction is only applied after the fact. Going 136 in a 130 zone, can get you pulled over. The cops probably won't care, but if you happen to cross paths with officer Grouchy McBadDay, you're looking at a €60 fine.
I miss those loud-colored Columbia jackets
He picked up that 105 pound brake rotor in one hand.
jezza for the win
3:46 Wow!
noice!!!
what an irony that is
I am from Australia and that 110 kph ?
What's the song at 7 minutes in?
the wannadies - you and me song
wow that was hard u blistering idiot
4:27 perfect name for the angila
HAHAHA, his "hair" was ADORABLE back then XD
Vyvyan would be proud......VERY METAL
1:32 what's that song called?
224 - 139 is 85 feet more
Everyone makes mistakes, even on-air for TV/Radio.
Yes,rounding is a beautiful thing to keep things simple
We should have speed limits based on the age of the vehicle. Anything with its year on its licence plate (i.e. from 2001 I think?) should have higher limits. Everything older should remain at the current limits.
Honestly, I was driving today in the rain and even then some of the 30 mph zones feel ridiculous.
I actually managed to make it around a 25 mph cloverleaf at 41 mph.
is this year 1898?
The 911 has the legendary plate : 911 HUL
Surprising that the Lexus stopped in 30 fewer feet than the Porsche....
Very intresting - didn't know ether that the braking distances and "max speed in curves" did vary so much between cars. Did someone know what's the radius of the turning circle in the test?
But - the arguments for the low speed limits is even more rediculous than the difference between cars. Here in Sweden, we have the same low speed limits and is still allowed to go 110 km/h during the winter, when it's snow and ice on the roads
- wich means the braking distance may easely increase 5 times or more. The braking distance may be longer from 110 km/h than from 200 km/h on dry roads.
If the speed limits where related to the stopping distance we would have to go max 50-60 km/h during winter, but almost anyone does at least 90 or 100 km/h on roads with 110 km/h speed limit (except for when it's really bad weather conditions). Still - people killed on the roads is not much higher during the winter than the rest of the year...
This is one of only very few times you will see Jeremy driving a Porsche or a Peugeot and saying it was good.
Mr Needham’s first letter