Where's 'here', Terry?
Here, in so. Cal-it seems that people drive around 75-80 with a posted speed
limit of 65.
There was an intersting report of illusion of speed in trucks and SUVs-that
it's too easy to go faster than you think you're going. (Unlike in the Spit
where you feel like you're going 70-but you're only going 40!)
They talked to alot of people who were surprised to find they were going
20mph or so over the speed limit. And because there is this illusion of
going slower that you actually are, combined with a higher center of
gravity, that's why there's so many of these vehicles getting rolled.
Something to think about,
Laura
Vita brevis est: rapide agite, vigore strigate!
----- Original Message -----
From: Banbury, Terrence <Terrence.Banbury@dnr.state.oh.us>
To: Graham Stretch <technical@iwnet.screaming.net>
Cc: List Spitfires <spitfires@autox.team.net>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2000 7:04 AM
Subject: RE: seatbelts
>
> The "actual" norm for highways here is 75-80 mph. The maximum legal limit
> is 65 mph on most of those same highways.
> Terry Banbury
> Mk III (fast enough for me at 65)
>
> > ----------
> > From: Laura.G@141.com[SMTP:Laura.G@141.com]
> > Reply To: Laura.G@141.com
> > Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2000 3:59 PM
> > To: Graham Stretch; Jeff McNeal
> > Cc: List Spitfires
> > Subject: Re: seatbelts
> >
> >
> > They repealed the 55 here, in California- on freeways a couple of years
> > ago.
> > (Though I have found that people usually drive around 75-80.)
> >
> > In fact, there was a report released last week that traffic fatalities
did
> > not increase with the repeal pf the double nickel as was feared.
> >
> > Laura G.
> >
> > Vita brevis est: rapide agite, vigore strigate!
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Graham Stretch <technical@iwnet.screaming.net>
> > To: Jeff McNeal <jmcneal@ohms.com>
> > Cc: List Spitfires <spitfires@autox.team.net>
> > Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2000 12:27 PM
> > Subject: Re: seatbelts
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Hi Jeff
> > > I would like to book a place (as a spectator not a model!) tell me
where
> > and
> > > when and I'll do whatever it takes! Also what are the limits over
there,
> > I
> > > was under the impression that 55 was tops but I see from Joe that 75
is
> > an
> > > option, is that limited to certain states or is that wide spread?
> > >
> > > Graham.
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Jeff McNeal <jmcneal@ohms.com>
> > > To: Graham Stretch <technical@iwnet.screaming.net>; List Spitfires
> > > <spitfires@autox.team.net>
> > > Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2000 1:49 AM
> > > Subject: Re: seatbelts
> > >
> > >
> > > > Graham,
> > > >
> > > > Here in the states, you can have a "moving violation" (such as
> > speeding
> > > > ticket) expunged from your driving record, thereby saving you an
> > insurance
> > > > rate hike by attending "traffic school", which you have to pay to
> > attend.
> > > > My last session was about 10 years ago. Traffic school is an option
> > for
> > > > minor infractions, but usually not misdemeanors and must be approved
> > by
> > > the
> > > > traffic court judge.
> > > >
> > > > Traffic school takes an entire day to complete, but some have become
> > very
> > > > inventive. The last one I attended was called "lunch 'n learn" and
> > > included
> > > > eats in the middle of the day at the hotel restaurant where the
class
> > was
> > > > being held. There have also been "comedy" traffic schools and some
> > > > enterprising folks have even set one up on the Internet, but not all
> > > > municipalities are accepting this option for now.
> > > >
> > > > I kid you not about any of this.
> > > >
> > > > Best wishes,
> > > >
> > > > Jeff in San Diego
> > > >
> > > > P.S. I'm thinking about starting a "lingere modeling traffic
school"
> > if
> > I
> > > > can convince the wife that it will be a moneymaker and assure her
that
> > she
> > > > won't have to model.
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: Graham Stretch <technical@iwnet.screaming.net>
> > > > To: List Spitfires <spitfires@autox.team.net>
> > > > Sent: Friday, March 10, 2000 3:36 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: seatbelts
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Ok What do "you" have to do to go to traffic school, it's quite
hard
> > to
> > > > get
> > > > > a place over here! Never been to traffic school don't know how I
> > missed
> > > > out
> > > > > on that especially in my youth!
> > > > >
> > > > > Graham.
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: Banbury, Terrence <Terrence.Banbury@dnr.state.oh.us>
> > > > > To: Fred Thomas <vafred@erols.com>; 'Joe Curry' <spitlist@gte.net>
> > > > > Cc: <spitfires@autox.team.net>
> > > > > Sent: Friday, March 10, 2000 5:10 PM
> > > > > Subject: RE: seatbelts
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I went to traffic school recently myself. Oops. It was
> > informative,
> > > > but
> > > > > I
> > > > > > plan on not going again.
> > > > > > Terry
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----------
> > > > > > > From: Joe Curry[SMTP:spitlist@gte.net]
> > > > > > > Reply To: Joe Curry
> > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2000 8:39 PM
> > > > > > > To: Fred Thomas
> > > > > > > Cc: spitfires@autox.team.net
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: seatbelts
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Having just attended Traffic school (don't ask), I can say
that
> > in
> > > > > > > Arizona, cars older than 1972 are not required to have
> > seatbelts.
> > > The
> > > > > > > reason given is that was the first year that belts were
required
> > by
> > > > > > > law. I thought it was earlier than that!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Joe
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Fred Thomas wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > June, 1964, seat belts became mandatory standard equipment,
> > the
> > > > first
> > > > > > > year
> > > > > > > > or 2, they were not mandatory for the rear seats, even
though
> > most
> > > > > > > companys
> > > > > > > > did install them. "FT"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > "If you can't excel with talent, triumph with effort."
> > > > > > > -- Dave Weinbaum in National Enquirer
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
|