Limiting power for new drivers

obi_waynne

obi_waynne

Administrator
Staff member
Moderator
Points
1,157
Location
Deal, Kent UK
Car
A3 1.4 TFSI 150 COD
On motorbikes the power is limited depending on your age experience and the type of test you have taken.

Would this work if applied to cars? It seems bad that someone can pass their test one day and then find themselves owning a 300 BHP plus car the next day.

What restrictions if any would you put in place?
 
I think its a good idea,most of the lads at work have trashed there cars just after passing test due to power etc i think they should put a limit on the bhp for the first 18 months at least!.
 
Agreed. I might be young but I've seen enough of my friends crash high bhp cars within the first 6 months. I passed my test quite quickly so have been driving for 6 years nearly and the only crash I had was in the first 5 months of passing my test. Entirely my own fault, thinking I was already a 'pro' and not concentrating. I thank god I didn't hurt anyone.

Am I the only one who also thinks that there shouldn't be an alcohol limit? I think if you have alcohol in your system then quite simply...no driving. Nobody breathalyzes themselves before getting behind the wheel and even the smallest amount can affect your abilities to judge and react...and if you had enough of a skinful the night before then you should wait a full 24 hours before getting back behind the wheel???
 
It isnt a bad idea but it would need thinking about carefully.
On bikes it is cc but with todays technology you would have to have it pretty low say 750cc (and no turbos etc)
Power / weight ratio is actually most important ( in this context) so limiting power on its own will only do half the job -
If it was brought in then there would be instantly a new crop of cars to suit just like there was with bikes.
And then all the kids will be hurlting around flat out in convoy in tuned up smart cars or the like .

The mind boggles
.
 
I think the problem has to be tackled in a totally different manner.

first of all the law should be changed. People who who cause accidents with personal by reckless driving should be banned either for life or at least several years. Breaking the ban should result in at least 5 years prison and be held responsible to pay back the damage incurred (paying back to the insurance after the insurance has payed out to the affected ones).

Insurances should not be allowed to insure inexperienced drivers on high power cars and motorbikes. Anyone trying to circumnavigate this by modifying their carts beyond certain limits at this stage should have the car crushed, heavily fined and get at least a suspended prison sentence.

Driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs I would automatically punish with a prison sentence of 5 years.

Reckless driving causing casualties I would treat as attempted manslaughter.

Enforcing it this way, the accident levels would drop quite quickly as people would actually see some consequences on such actions once they see someone else going down for their actions.

@ Tashini - I am against the idea of having no alcohol limit. First of all because some people have naturally a certain alcohol level in their blood due their metabolism. Then you might have some levels left from having something drunk many hours before and you are convinced being in the the limits.

However, what I am in favour of is a much stricter checking. What is the point to laws, which hardly are being enforced?
 
I think it's a good idea.

Vx seem to have caught on to the fact that kids need cheap cars to insute but they want them to look good. They do a Corsa 1.2 with VXR styling and I think, for the market they are aiming at, it looks good, I'm seeing loads of them round here these days. They certainly look better than a halfrauds ripspeed bodged-up Corsa.
 
just put a cc limit on new drivers, 17-20 = 1.3, 21-24 = 1.6, 25+ = 1.8. that would be the best way to do it. and those with a provisional = 1.1, the older the driver the more likely they have a family and children so that's why the maximum engine size is upped. these engine sizes are based on the 1st year of driving.
 
LPMorgan said:
just put a cc limit on new drivers, 17-20 = 1.3, 21-24 = 1.6, 25+ = 1.8. that would be the best way to do it. and those with a provisional = 1.1, the older the driver the more likely they have a family and children so that's why the maximum engine size is upped. these engine sizes are based on the 1st year of driving.
Click to expand...

This willsolve nothing. It is very easy t increase the power to silly amounts and most likely turning the cars into death traps.
 
LPMorgan said:
just put a cc limit on new drivers, 17-20 = 1.3, 21-24 = 1.6, 25+ = 1.8. that would be the best way to do it. and those with a provisional = 1.1, the older the driver the more likely they have a family and children so that's why the maximum engine size is upped. these engine sizes are based on the 1st year of driving.
Click to expand...

How did you arrive at such precise figures?
 
Anyone over 25 is limited to a 1.8??

Car manufacuters will just slap bit turbos on 1.3 engines to get round it.

Ive just moved from a 1.6 to a 2.0 and this car is alot safer to everyone than the last. Beleive me.

Engine size doesnt determine power, speed or general safety.
 
Charliep said:
@ Tashini - I am against the idea of having no alcohol limit. First of all because some people have naturally a certain alcohol level in their blood due their metabolism. Then you might have some levels left from having something drunk many hours before and you are convinced being in the the limits.

However, what I am in favour of is a much stricter checking. What is the point to laws, which hardly are being enforced?
Click to expand...

I had forgotten about the natural level if I'm honest. However In still think the limit should be lowered. Anyone who has even one drink should not be allowed to drive. I know people might argue this with the point of getting to hospital quickly, but that is what the emergency services are for.
It also needs to be checked with more regularity. How many people get away with it time and time again and then end up in an accident that is sometimes fatal? Nobody should die because of somebody else's inability to say no to a few pints of stella.

I also agree the sentences for all of the things discussed need to be harsher. A straight forward custodial sentence for anyone over the limit would stop a lot of people who currently get behind the wheel doing so. I don't risk it anyway, but I have more than just a few brain cells in my head. Personally, the thought of hurting someone because of my unwillingness to say no to a drink is enough for me to get a taxi or walk.
 
1.6 or1.8 litres ???? that can be 200bhp+ easy
If you are going to restrict the power (and i do agree with CP on this ) it would need to be 750cc max .

Anything over that and the manufactureres will be bring things out that make the rule a joke.

And as said before even then we will have loads of racing smarts or similar
 
Thinking about this you could probably apply the restriction to the lowest car tax bands as it's based on emissions and you don't get fast cars that have really low emissions levels!

I think we could be on to a winner here!
 
Well... I own a 1.9 D turbo. 90hp standard, but is every one forgetting that, when modifing your vehicle you MUST inform the ensurence company on any performance upgrades. If you crash and they find out you have maybe put throttle bodies on, uprated injecters etc to boost power it invalidates your insurence? Personally, I can't see how they would find out.....
 
I see the beginnings of some really good ideas here but! I find myself thinking back to when I first got behind the wheel of a car many years ago!
If somebody told me then that I could only drive a 1000cc car or less until I matured some more with my driving experience, I think I would have hit the roof :amazed: It is all very well for us to say restrict this and stop that! but I can't help but wonder what is actually the best solution for such a contentious subject? A difficult one that's for sure, and I for one am very glad that I do not have the task in trying to find a satisfactory conclusion that will need to please everybody.
 
then on 1.8 cars have a 130hp limit, 1.6 = 105hp, and 1.3 = 80 hp. but only do the law as the 1st year of driving. once you've done a full year then it opens up so you can drive what car you want. it would prevent rich parents buying their 17 year old a 2.0 subaru wxr sti... and ban turbo's on these limits.
 
LPMorgan said:
then on 1.8 cars have a 130hp limit, 1.6 = 105hp, and 1.3 = 80 hp. but only do the law as the 1st year of driving. once you've done a full year then it opens up so you can drive what car you want. it would prevent rich parents buying their 17 year old a 2.0 subaru wxr sti... and ban turbo's on these limits.
Click to expand...

Too complex and next to impossible to enforce.

Besides, many new drivers get themselves into knotty situations regardless of their car's performance ability.
I really don't have a proposition to fix this.

Any car can be driven too fast for a given situation.
 
LPMorgan said:
what about the motorcycle system? it's a really simple system and i've just altered it for car application. how is it complex?
Click to expand...

At the end of the day it does not matter how fast a car is. It does matter how the power is being used.

Unfortunately the restrictions you want to employ hit the ones that are reasonable. The only way to prevent people abusing what they have got is strict sentencing.

A foreign proverb goes like this: "Where there is no accuser there is no judge".

Limiting alcohol, speed, power etc is all useless when no enforcement is available. The whole enforcement of the law in Britain currently is like an army in the war being on holidays. Additionally the authorities impose the wrong things at the wrong time making all even worse.

however, life threatening actions need severe punishment not slaps on the wrist over a cup of tea.
 
On this subject, i'm unsure what limiting things is really going to help with. Regardless of the car, if someone is going to be a prat, they're going to be a prat. Law or no law. I have always wanted a bigger car knowing that when I get it, I will drive around professionally, that's the way i'm wired. Same doesn't go for all.
I wish they put black boxes in cars (not just for insurance) so as when someone does have a smack then the punishment dealt (or not dealt as the case maybe) can be based off actual evidence based on the drivers.
 
Trouble with black boxes is who defines how fast 'too fast round a corner' is?

Young drivers, especially blokes, crash cos their ego's writing pay cheques their bodies can't cash.

In other words, inexperience. Inexperience can kill you even if you're driving a 1.0 Corsa.
 
Last edited:
Yugguy said:
Trouble with black boxes is who defines how fast 'too fast round a corner' is?

Young drivers, especially blokes, crash cos their ego's writing pay cheques their bodies can't cash.

In other words, inexperience. Inexperience can kill you even if you're driving a 1.0 Corsa.
Click to expand...

This is not quite true. Female drivers are getting a lot more aggressive in these days and some insurances class women now a higher risk than men.
 
It isnt inexperience it is age (as in mental ). People that start driving at 25 dont have accidents in the first year at the same level as 17 year olds.

The only way to stop 17 year olds from having accidents is to raise the age limit to 18(etc).
 
Charliep said:
This is not quite true. Female drivers are getting a lot more aggressive in these days and some insurances class women now a higher risk than men.
Click to expand...


School run mums.

I work in a private school, so the parents are wealthy, and the mothers are dreadful, they sit in entrences waiting for thier kids, they just pull up expecting others to move, ALWAYS on there mobile phone. In one lunchtime I saw 6 ladies in 4x4's on there mobile phones. Yet mens ensurence is higher?

Also, we have fly over in Chelmsford ( those in Essex should know ) and a lady went up it the wrong way and caused a horrific accident. The way it works is, on end is closed to people coming off the dual carrigeway can get into town at a certain time, then that end closes and the other end opens and allows cars onto the dual carrigeway. there are signs CLEARLY stating its either closed or open and She went up it when the dual carrigeway was open. I think she died actually.
 
Last edited:
SLEEPER said:
It isnt inexperience it is age (as in mental ). People that start driving at 25 dont have accidents in the first year at the same level as 17 year olds.

The only way to stop 17 year olds from having accidents is to raise the age limit to 18(etc).
Click to expand...

To be honest, I don't think age is the problem. Its inexperience.

When doing lessons I think we need to cover motorway driving and advanced driving techqniues to ensure safe driving. When you pass, you pass with the bare minimum knowledge to drive. If you passed at 28 you'll be as experienced as a 17 year old who has just passed too. Age has no effect on driving knowledge and experience.
 
davalav said:
To be honest, I don't think age is the problem. Its inexperience.

When doing lessons I think we need to cover motorway driving and advanced driving techqniues to ensure safe driving. When you pass, you pass with the bare minimum knowledge to drive. If you passed at 28 you'll be as experienced as a 17 year old who has just passed too. Age has no effect on driving knowledge and experience.
Click to expand...

Age has a massive influence on attitude though and that's the point you've totally overlooked or dismissed.
 
What about the physical size of a car, surely smaller cars are safer and easier to handle than larger ones?

I'd also say that insurance costs are so high that most new drivers are already restricted to the sort of cars they can choose to drive quite heavily.
 
HDi fun said:
Age has a massive influence on attitude though and that's the point you've totally overlooked or dismissed.
Click to expand...


I guess I am rather mature for my age. All my friends went for 1.4 - 1.6 Fiesta's and I went with a diesel ( mpg value of course ) So I supposed its my opinion. I still think age doesn't matter. Maybe Parents could help out? My mum wouldn't allow me to have a high powered car for a first, the only reason I have a 1.9 D turbo is becuase the insurence is actually very cheap, paired with good milage and as I work almost 35 minutes away it helps. My attitude to driving is probably more mature then my friends as I value money a little better and I have to pay for everything! :p

Would you allow your 17 year old son/daughter to have a 2.0 litre for thier first car, even if you could afford the insurence?
 
davalav said:
To be honest, I don't think age is the problem. Its inexperience.

When doing lessons I think we need to cover motorway driving and advanced driving techqniues to ensure safe driving. When you pass, you pass with the bare minimum knowledge to drive. If you passed at 28 you'll be as experienced as a 17 year old who has just passed too. Age has no effect on driving knowledge and experience.
Click to expand...

Then why did you post this..............
My attitude to driving is probably more mature then my friends as I value money a little better and I have to pay for everything! :toung:
and...............
Would you allow your 17 year old son/daughter to have a 2.0 litre for thier first car, even if you could afford the insurence?
 
What I was saying is.... Age doesn't have an effect on your driving. It's the experience which is more valuable of course. But I also went on to say after having a think, new drivers can techinically drive anything they want if they can afford the insurence... Thats why parents should have an effect on what car there child has first. But if you are 28... then I presume your smart enough to get a suitable car, to get used to driving by your self.

I guess it was a little hypercritical of me, but allowing your son/ daughter to have a high litre/powered car DOESN'T determine the kids maturity.

Hopefully I cleared that up a little...
 
davalav said:
I guess I am rather mature for my age. All my friends went for 1.4 - 1.6 Fiesta's and I went with a diesel ( mpg value of course ) So I supposed its my opinion. I still think age doesn't matter. Maybe Parents could help out? My mum wouldn't allow me to have a high powered car for a first, the only reason I have a 1.9 D turbo is becuase the insurence is actually very cheap, paired with good milage and as I work almost 35 minutes away it helps. My attitude to driving is probably more mature then my friends as I value money a little better and I have to pay for everything! :p

Would you allow your 17 year old son/daughter to have a 2.0 litre for thier first car, even if you could afford the insurence?
Click to expand...

Mate, your attitude is different to most of young drivers' attitudes. I don't consider you to be a specific liability because of what you've said here. Sadly, you're in the minority.
 
Actually I disagree. You just hear about the ones that cause the mayhem. Go into any sixth form or college and take a look at the driving styles of the students. These are all young and inexperienced. MOST have a very careful and mature approach to driving. Sadly, like many things in life...the minority who have the bad attitudes are the ones who affect the majority.
 
The phrase ...........if you are 28 I presume you are smart enough...... sums it up

i suppose another way of putting it would be

At 17 or 28 you know if something is wrong or not its just that at 17 you are less likely to worry about it
 
i'm 21 and will be buying a pug 206 1.6 petrol, doesn't mean i'll be driving round like an idiot, yeah i'll be modifying it but it's also gotta be used for the shopping run. not all young drivers are, it's usually the chavs who have most accident due to them thinking "i'm jonny rock mate, innit mate" lol. my cousin who was 24 at the time, crashed his corsa 1.1 several years back, colour coded body kit, interior and exterior neon. proper boy racer and wrote his car off twice. i think the driving test should be like the finnish test..
 
Last edited:
but women drivers annoy me. always on mobile phones is massive landrovers, don't indicate, doing make up while driving. i've seem more accidents involving women than i have young men, also old people are prone to accidents and scuffs due to reaction time being slower etc... it's £1400 on insurance for me with a 1.6ltr pug 206, it's only £1320 on the same model but 1.4ltr, got my partner to get a quote and hers was only 1200 on the 1.6 lol i was gobsmacked
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Similar threads
Thread starter Title Forum Replies Date
obi_waynne Limiting slow vehicles General car Chat 5
obi_waynne Speed limiting devices General car Chat 37
charger69 top speed limiting, stupid! General car Chat 19
H Opinion about Chip Power or Pro Racing Tuning Box General car Chat 0
N Power gain help General car Chat 3
C HELP can’t find power upgrades for VW General car Chat 1

Similar threads


Please watch this on my YouTube channel & Subscribe.


Back
Top