RMweb Premium spamcan61 Posted January 18, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 18, 2011 If you set cruise control to 70mph for a UK motorway trip and suddenly need to accelerate away from a situation briefly you may be unable to do so. And in the event that you did get stopped for speeding in such an event it's worth remembering that there is always the opportunity to explain your circumstances; a very short burst at 75 to avoid a major collision occurring is possibly justifiable. I've never ever known a car with cruise control that doesn't allow you to speed up instantly, some disengage the CC in this scenario, some don't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Brinkly Posted January 18, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 18, 2011 In my Volvo V40 I have CC, and I tend to only use it on motorways or empty duel carriageways. The mechanic who has serviced my parents Volvo's for the past 20 plus years said to me not to use the CC when it was wet or icy, as although you can dab the brake peddle, or turn it off on the indicator lever, there is still a delay which you wouldn't get if you purely lifted your foot off the peddle. Really it is down to ones own reactions, but I really wouldn't use it when wet or icy, purely because you are not fully in control of the car! Having said that my Dad who has a Jaguar XJ which is only a couple of months old has a far more advanced CC system, linked to traction control and so on, so the car will accelerate and brake differently on different road conditions when either driving normally, or when using the CC. I suppose it's down to the cars computer system and how brave you are! Regards, Nick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium spamcan61 Posted January 18, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 18, 2011 My Vectra has 'old school' cruise control, there is a stepper motor and cable that yanks the gas pedal away from your foot when you engage it, so there could be some delay when disengaging. Most modern cars are 'drive by wire' these days, no throttle cable, so there should be no delay on disengaging. The main issue with slippery conditions is presumably that different wheels may report different roadspeeds, which will confuse the hell out of the CC. I too mainly use the CC for motorways and speed restrictions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrestburyJack Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 ...... and I tend to only use it on motorways or empty duel carriageways. Regards, Nick. 'Duel' carriageways - are these the sort where other drivers 'cut you up'? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Brinkly Posted January 18, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 18, 2011 'Duel' carriageways - are these the sort where other drivers 'cut you up'? Yeah I slap a glove in their face and challenge them! (Its been a long day alright! I had to take year 1 today! ) Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 Its been a long day alright! I had to take year 1 today! I don't know, backclassed again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Taz Posted January 18, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 18, 2011 Most of my driving is on the motorway / dual carriageway and I regularly use CC, but only in the right conditions. How could you use it in stop start, variable driving conditions anyway? The main reason I use it is to improve fuel economy but I really notice how inconsistent other drivers road speed can be. I'll overtake someone and a mile later they will pass me again only to slow down again a bit further up the road. I know my speed is constant. One final thought: The Institute of Advance Motorists recommend the use of CC. I, for one, rate their opinion of what constitutes safe driving more than anyone elses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Pannier Tank Posted January 18, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 18, 2011 I've never ever known a car with cruise control that doesn't allow you to speed up instantly, some disengage the CC in this scenario, some don't. With my Ford Focus there is a slight delay (when using Cruise Control) after 'putting my foot down' and accelerating, though this may be due to it being an automatic and not manual box. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTC Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 There's a lot of crap still on the internet - I know because I was part of some historic audio recordings (a very small part) and the nonsense that's written about them has built up to huge mythologic status. When I say to someone "...but I was there, I knew the guys involved....." I often get back ""it's on the internet, though....." you can't win. It might be thread creep, but knowing the business you're in, you've got to let us in to that one! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baby Deltic Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 As someone who suffers from psoriatic arthritis but has to drive as part of my job, I think cruise control is a Godsend. I can rest my feet and maintain a safe distance from the vehicle in front, plus I can click the speed up and down from the steering wheel. In 30mph zones I put the car in third gear and set the cruise at 30mph and the car will not deviate, so I can be looking out for children near the road, or other hazards, without having to look down at the speedo. Unfortunately cruise control does not compensate for bad driving, and I'm constantly looking out for 'wanna's and 'gonna's. - wanna's being drivers who intend to change lane and will indicate and wait for you to pass or slow down and let them pull out, and gonna's being the type of idiots who think that two flashes of their right indicator gives them carte blanche to immediately pull out at 60mph into traffic approaching at 70mph plus in the next lane. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edcayton Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 Can I point out that 30 is the LIMIT and not the TARGET, and that driving at an undeviating 30 is NOT a safe way to drive. Ed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nickinwestwales Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 If you cant be bothered to DRIVE your car,then take a taxi,bus or-better still,train-please dont rely on a circuit board with a fixed number of parameters to do the job for you:-It might be my wife and daughter that are in the way when `computer says no`and suddenly everything gets bu**ered up beyond your worst nightmares........... Please think on this,thank you Regards Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baby Deltic Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 Can I point out that 30 is the LIMIT and not the TARGET, and that driving at an undeviating 30 is NOT a safe way to drive. Ed True, and anyone with common sense would drive past a school at 20mph, but generally 30mph is safe in built up areas. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baby Deltic Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 If you cant be bothered to DRIVE your car,then take a taxi,bus or-better still,train-please dont rely on a circuit board with a fixed number of parameters to do the job for you:-It might be my wife and daughter that are in the way when `computer says no`and suddenly everything gets bu**ered up beyond your worst nightmares........... Please think on this,thank you Regards Nick I would rather step into the road in front of someone who is looking where they are going than someone who is being obsessive about their speedo. I think you'll find that the electronics which controls cruise speed has hundreds of safeguards built into it by the manufacturer and is tested to destruction and bombarded with EMC from mobile phones and other devices to make sure it is fit for purpose. If the ECU failed it would more than likely go into 'limp' mode and the car would not be able to go more than 30mph anyway if it could even move at all. Sadly speed is being blamed as the cause of almost every accident and fatality to try and justify 'safety' camera's and it simply is not true. Every time the Police quote 'misuse of speed' in an accident report these camera and road safety merchants jump on the word 'speed' and add it to their 'statistics'. Nothing can compensate for driving skill and awareness. Cruise control is merely a tool which can assist the driver by managing the speed of the vehicle, it isn't an auto-pilot and should never be treated as such, I still keep an eye on the vehicle's speed but I don't obsess about it and panic brake when I come near a speed camera like a lot of drivers do, even though they are within the speed limit. I still see idiots tailgating, pulling out and driving round roundabouts without indicating and roaring off at 40 through 30 limits whenever I'm out on the road. Its just a shame there is never a Police car about when it happens. I also still see many near misses because of people swerving across multiple lanes of dual carriageways without indicating among other things. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium skipepsi Posted January 19, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 19, 2011 I never thought I would ever say we need more traffic police cars but we do, there is a lack of thought out there which is staggering. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baby Deltic Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 I never thought I would ever say we need more traffic police cars but we do, there is a lack of thought out there which is staggering. We do indeed need more traffic Officers monitoring peoples over all driving. I think there is a need to stop thinking about road safety in terms of the outcome of accidents and more about what REALLY causes them. Speed does not kill in itself. It is the DIFFERENCE in speed that causes the damage, and the greater the difference in speed between two colliding objects, the greater the energy involved. I agree that excessive speed is dangerous and un-necessary, but we need to be looking more at why more and more vehicles are getting onto collision paths in the first place, and I'll bet that careless driving, mobile phones and other distractions, plus a lack of judgement and non-use of mirrors are a serious contributing factor. If you go on any dual carriageway you will generally find that most drivers drive at about the 85th percentile and maintain a safe distance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
noiseboy72 Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 The main reason I use it is to improve fuel economy but I really notice how inconsistent other drivers road speed can be. I'll overtake someone and a mile later they will pass me again only to slow down again a bit further up the road. I know my speed is constant. Actually, this is not true. Fuel economy will be worse when using cruise control than a carefully driven car without, as the cruise control will apply more power on hills while a "human" will naturally tend to allow the speed to tail of and keep throttle pressure constant. Its only 3 or 4 MPG, but it does make a difference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Taz Posted January 19, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 19, 2011 Sorry, but I disagree with that. Actual tests and reports have been run to prove the point. That is why manufacturers and motoring organisations actually quote fuel economy as a reason to use CC. When I get time later I will dig out some links to the reports that came to these conclusions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium spamcan61 Posted January 19, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 19, 2011 Actually, this is not true. Fuel economy will be worse when using cruise control than a carefully driven car without, as the cruise control will apply more power on hills while a "human" will naturally tend to allow the speed to tail of and keep throttle pressure constant. Its only 3 or 4 MPG, but it does make a difference. Agreed, for maximum economy you should drive like a Bulleid pacific west of Sailsbury, charge* down the hills and then ease off up the inclines. * Within safe speed limits... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Wintle Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 Actually, this is not true. Fuel economy will be worse when using cruise control than a carefully driven car without, as the cruise control will apply more power on hills while a "human" will naturally tend to allow the speed to tail of and keep throttle pressure constant. Its only 3 or 4 MPG, but it does make a difference. I would disagree from personal experience. On the same long route, in similar traffic and weather conditions, and trying to maintain the same speed (~65 mph), the cruise control on my car will outperfom my foot by about 5%, I think primarily because it makes more subtle throttle adjustments than are usually possible with the throttle pedal. Note that I was not letting the car creep above that speed on downhills or tail off on uphills since that would vary the speed differential with the traffic (such as there was) around me - the intention was to get where I was going at the fastest safe speed that wouldn't attract the attention of the various authorities. Adrian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pennine MC Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 We do indeed need more traffic Officers monitoring peoples over all driving. I think there is a need to stop thinking about road safety in terms of the outcome of accidents and more about what REALLY causes them. ... I agree that excessive speed is dangerous and un-necessary, but we need to be looking more at why more and more vehicles are getting onto collision paths in the first place, and I'll bet that careless driving, mobile phones and other distractions, plus a lack of judgement and non-use of mirrors are a serious contributing factor. Lloyd, I wont requote everything you've said just to agree with it, but this is the nub of it AFAIC ...as the cruise control will apply more power on hills while a "human" will naturally tend to allow the speed to tail of and keep throttle pressure constant. Um, this human wouldnt. If you're on an undulating motorway, in order not to hinder traffic flow, you should surely attempt to maintain a constant speed both up and down hill (assuming your vehicle is capable) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
northendboy Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 A Fiat 128 Sport I had in the early 80's had a 'cruise control' linked by cable directly to the throttle which worked in the same way as a choke; ie pull out and twist to lock. That was positively lethal as a) it had no idea of the actual speed of the car and used to struggle up hills and career down them and b, it didn't come off when you braked, so you ended up trying to brake against the engine. Great fun... I now have an Alfa 159 and the cruise control is brilliant, wouldn't be without it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
28XX Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 Big thumbs up for the CC in Mrs 28XX's Mercedes C180. Set to 70, let the car regulate speed, look ahead, anticipate other drivers actions and change lanes correctly to maintain a safe distance. If there's nowhere to go, dab the brake for instant disengage, then pull the stalk to resume when the muppets have moved over. Simples. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordon s Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 Why is it that anything about driving brings out the worst in mankind? Too fast, too slow, the middle lane, hat wearers and so on. Provided you drive well and show consideration for others, then who am I to dictate what you do. If you don't like cruise control don't use it. If you do then carry on. My passion for cars was dominated from the age of 17-50 by high powered sports saloons. A manual box, petrol and tons of power were essential for me. Now in my 60's my last three cars have been diesel automatics and that desire for cornering power and all out speed has gone out the window and comfort is number one. I know I'm tempting providence but I've had a clean licence for over 40 years, but that's the thing about driving, it can always change the next time you get in a car. Today is a special day for me. Sixteen years ago today my wife and 18 year old son were both killed in a head on car accident. A transit van lost control in icy conditions and swerved across the road and straight into them. Once the grief had eased I had no hatred for the driver who had turned my world upside down. It was an accident. End of. Over the years we've all made mistakes driving and you think there for the grace of God. Accidents happen and there are many contributing factors. Used properly any driving aid can help us avoid accidents. I agree with BD, I am even more alert with cruise control on, particularly in low speed areas (20 or 30) as even the slightest excess of the right pedal can soon put you way past the limit. I just happen to love cruise control and it makes my journey easier and does improve my fuel consumption by around 4mpg. Will you convince me it's a bad thing? No, but no more than I will convince you to use one. Thanks for the posts though, sometimes it's fun to sit back and enjoy the arguments.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 If you cant be bothered to DRIVE your car,then take a taxi,bus or-better still,train-please dont rely on a circuit board with a fixed number of parameters to do the job for you:-It might be my wife and daughter that are in the way when `computer says no`and suddenly everything gets bu**ered up beyond your worst nightmares........... Please think on this,thank you Regards Nick Are you implying by that comment that those of us who use Cruise Control cannot drive? By shouting (using capitals) it certainly seems that way to me and I find that comment especially insulting. Perhaps this topic needs a little more consideration for the opinions of other members' point of view - as that is all that is being expressed here - and a little less condemnation and bullying. As there seems no factual evidence (law) to support the OP and cruise control continues to be fitted to vehicles the decision remains with the indivual motorist on when it is appropriate to use it or if they have the confidence in its engineering to use it at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.