Driving age to be 18....

[Pete]

How good you drive is nothing to do with age, it's to do with experience.

You could say maturity come in, but this is reached at different times for people (I know 30 year olds that act like 17)

Raising the age by a year won't make a jot of difference apart from delaying another few thousand cars on the road one year to help fudge the DTI figures for reducing traffic.

[Scoboblio]

With regards to driving jobs, there are not that many companies out there that will happily recruit a driver under 21 years old as unsurance would be far to high for them. The only one I can think of is a garage, pizza/takeaway delivery boy.

 

We're not necessarily talking about driving jobs - plenty of people have to drive to work because public transport in their home area is, quite simply, crap.

 

And I can't see the idea of a timeframe for learning helping - some driving instructors are great, others are useless, likewise with their students - learning to drive is already too expensive IMO.

 

Young drivers are treated like scum by much of society, and 99% of the time, it's wrong. Yes, young people do have more accidents, because they're young, inexperienced, and sometimes feel invincible, but that's one reason why they pay stupid, extortionate, p**s taking insurance premiums, even after driving claim free for two or three years.

[Ian R]

[paul_y3k]

interesting point about not being able to drive the bigger powered cars. i dont think you need to legislate for it, given that most 17yr old's cant afford to insure those types of cars anyay.

I would imagine the majority of these accidents were caused by lack of experience in Saxo's etc rather than supra's

[SMiFFAD]

Of course when you were all 17 you were absolute angels, and now you're older you can persecute every teenager with the prejudice of being a bad driver.

 

No... were just older we can look back and see exactly how dangerous we probably were, and how much we wouldnt want to share a road with our 17yo selves now.

 

As for 17yo's needing to drive to get to their jobs, hog-wash... they survived untill they were 17 without a car, and generations before them survived their entire lives without a car. Very few people out there can say they NEED a car for anything.

[Scoboblio]

As for 17yo's needing to drive to get to their jobs, hog-wash... they survived untill they were 17 without a car, and generations before them survived their entire lives without a car. Very few people out there can say they NEED a car for anything.

 

Until they were 17, they may not have had a job, they'd be in school or college. I'm speaking from experience here, having come from a small country village with absolutely no hope of local employment - my CV got chucked in the bin by employers in the local towns because I couldn't drive and therefore didn't stand a hope in hell of doing the hours they wanted - and this was for a part time job while I was at college.

 

Very few people out there can say they NEED a car for anything? Sounds like you've lived your entire life in a town with good public transport then - either that or lived close to work.

 

Edited to make another point: At about 14 (I think) you're expected to pay FULL price on all public transport, but you're not allowed to drive until age 17, or work (properly) until 16. How fair is that?

[cashpoint]

raising the age will do f all so instead of it being 17-25 that have the most accidents it'll be 18-25 and they will be a similar number of accidents. A limit on engine power would be better in a similar way to bikes. In fact I can't see why there isn't as I think the bike limits are perfect.

[Ian R]

raising the age will do f all so instead of it being 17-25 that have the most accidents it'll be 18-25 and they will be a similar number of accidents. A limit on engine power would be better in a similar way to bikes. In fact I can't see why there isn't as I think the bike limits are perfect.

 

But is it power in the case of cars. Now I will admit that I was younger there was places I would overtake in my 1400 that I would dream of overtaking in my single Turbo supra now. Perhaps a few close shaves wouldn't have been so close with more power. I now find that the power is there to get me "out of trouble" if I need it

[SMiFFAD]

 

Very few people out there can say they NEED a car for anything? Sounds like you've lived your entire life in a town with good public transport then - either that or lived close to work.

 

Grew up on a farm in the deepest darkest parts of wiltshire actually

 

If i needed to travel the 8 miles to the local town i got a bus, which required a 20 min walk to a bus stop. Its just a case that people these days have lost the use of their legs, if a bus doesnt stop in their bedroom and carry them on in the morning its considered barbarric

 

Now i live 2 miles from where i work, meaning i dont rely on my car, or even a bus to get me to work.

[leelbuk]

Warning long.....

 

Raising the age limit for driving will not solve the problem at all. Experience definately makes a difference and it shows - my mate passed his test at nearly 26yrs old and he drives as bad as the stereotypical 17yr old. The difference here is definately peer pressure and security.

 

Yes I like to drive fast myself but he drives fast in places where I would drive slow, makes sharp movemnts with the steering wheel, drives too close to some people on the motorway, wheelspins etc. All just because other people do or too look fast etc like a motorist fasion statement

 

Common sense and knowing what happens when you drive too fast in the wrong place at wrong time etc would help here.

 

An example is taking fork lift license test - they show you a vid of what happens when you don't think, look etc and show a scene where someone has been decapitated because they weren't aware of their surroundings.

 

Couldn't they do something similar with driving a car - i.e. driving up someones @rse does this...

 

Driving to fast round a corner caused understeer and then this... and maybe even examine it like they do with hazard perception etc.

 

IMO knowing how a car handles when its pushed beyond its limits is just as important as knowing your stopping distances

 

On a sidenote - I think that driving a RWD car should have involved some training - its totally different than driving a FWD car and all the rules change and oversteer replaces understeer etc. And I'd lie if I said that I have always been in complete control of my Supra.

You wouldn't let someone who drives a car drive a HGV without examining them on the differences first would you...

[Scoboblio]

Grew up on a farm in the deepest darkest parts of wiltshire actually

 

If i needed to travel the 8 miles to the local town i got a bus, which required a 20 min walk to a bus stop. Its just a case that people these days have lost the use of their legs, if a bus doesnt stop in their bedroom and carry them on in the morning its considered barbarric

 

Now i live 2 miles from where i work, meaning i dont rely on my car, or even a bus to get me to work.

 

We'll have to disagree on this one then. I view the car as a vital part of modern life. IMO anyone who passed their test at 17 and proudly took to the road shortly after, and is now claiming that those damn pesky kids shouldn't have the same opportunity is a complete and utter hypocrite.

 

And just for the record, I've rather share the road with a million 17 year old Brits than 100 Greek or Italian drivers. Just IMO.

[cashpoint]

But is it power in the case of cars. Now I will admit that I was younger there was places I would overtake in my 1400 that I would dream of overtaking in my single Turbo supra now. Perhaps a few close shaves wouldn't have been so close with more power. I now find that the power is there to get me "out of trouble" if I need it

 

Limit on engine size is pointless thanks to cars like R5 GT Turbo, RX7 Charade GTTI, all have engines have below 1.4 but can develop stupid power.

 

Power when you are young gets you into trouble more than out of trouble as your going to show off. We all still do it know but know when we go past what we can do. When your younger you think you know it all and are gods gift to driving, not knowing the limits. When i was younger it was my friends that had the more powerful cars that had the accidents.

 

So power is the best way, run it in the same way as bikes.

[Sparky]

Im still waiting for a decent explanation as to why upping the driving age 1 year will make a diference. I see people in my local town who are 25 - 30 and still drive like dicks.

 

Retest at 60 i think as well.

[kieren1234]

I cant see it making any difference imo.

[kieren1234]

Im still waiting for a decent explanation as to why upping the driving age 1 year will make a diference. I see people in my local town who are 25 - 30 and still drive like dicks.

 

Retest at 60 i think as well.

 

100% behind you on that one mate. Alot of old people just dont want to admit they are not fit to drive anymore. My grandad being one of them.

[Guest Phillw454]

I think its a good idea.

 

But is VERY unfair to say all young drivers are bad. Yes we lack experiance etc but that counts for very little 99% of the time. Im not 21 and my last 3 cars have all had over 200bhp and never crashed any of them, lost control in them, spun them or anything else.

 

I dont class myself as a good driver as soon as people do that they get too confident and cocky and drive beyond their limits.

 

So overall not all us young uns are the same:) my 1st 4 cars were under 2.0 litres, im now 20 and owned 7 cars, FWD, 4WD and RWD and never had a problem controlling any of them (touch wood).

 

If you need anymore examples then are num1 at the mo Lewis.H 22 and driving F1 (Yes i know hes been groomed since he was like 11)

 

 

Anyway yes 18 for driving good idea. As for insurance, thats fine how it is if not over priced. I had to pay nearly £1500 on a 1.1 for my 1st car, since then never had a quote under £1000:(

[tbourner]

Why is everyone replying saying it just delays the stupidity a year, that's not the point, it's not delaying the driving until 18, it's saying they can't take the TEST until they're 18, so they will have a whole year of experience (driving to work/college or wherever they need to go), but with someone else in the car with them at all times, I know I'd feel a lot more confident taking my test if I'd been driving for a year!!!

 

Trouble with it is, the full driver in the car with them will get complacent after about 3-6 months when the learner gets a bit better, and won't bother paying attention after that, so accidents will still happen.

Also, what will happen to the numbers of uninsured and -more importantly- unlicensed drivers that we have - won't they go up?

[Guest Phillw454]

Really it wont make a big diffrence. You get good drivers and bad drivers. I passed my test after 30 lessons without any other driving experiance and only 1 minor and no accidents in 2.5 years.

 

Likewise i know people that fail their theory 4 or 5 times have 70 or so lessons and still get 8 or 9 minors but sooner or later they will pass. But wont be a confident or good driver because it doesnt come naturally to them.

[Daston]

I always thought it took you a year on average to pass your test anyway. Or is it to stop these "you'll pass in 1 week or your money back" things

[tbourner]

Took me 3 months! Can't remember how many lessons though, think it was about 18 hours.

[Scoboblio]

Why is everyone replying saying it just delays the stupidity a year, that's not the point, it's not delaying the driving until 18, it's saying they can't take the TEST until they're 18, so they will have a whole year of experience (driving to work/college or wherever they need to go), but with someone else in the car with them at all times,

 

Not exactly effective though is it? To say to your parents "do you mind coming to work / college with me every day for a year?" And I'm sure the idea of insuring / taxing / maintaining a car that they can't even drive on their own would fill them with joy.

 

Even if it's only delaying the test, does anyone really think that 17 year olds would be stupid enough to pay for a year of driving lessons they don't need? Course not, they'll just start learning closer to their 18th birthday.

 

There shouldn't be a need to delay the test at all - the test should be a proper indication that a person is ready to take to the road uninstructed, regardless of how long they've been learning for. If it's not doing that, it's the test that needs changing, nothing else.

[bolarbag]

If it's not doing that, it's the test that needs changing, nothing else

 

Good post, why isnt the test more intense for all drivers never mind young un's?

 

To be honest, most of the young folk in the modded scene bar a few drive carefully on the roads to prevent damage to their prides and joy, and due to insurance restrictions their cars are generally lower power anyway.

 

As long as the population grows and there is less poverty in life then more people are going to own cars at an earlier age, the death/crash rate is bound to increase, it wont be stopped by dealying it for a year, another example of sh*te government think tanks, and wasting tax payers money(even more so if they implement it)

[hogmaw]

It might also help young drivers to be safer if they had to watch a video like

before they were free to drive on the roads

[ivan]

You can't drive but, we will send you to war if you join up......go figure!

Nope, no wars until you're 18 I'm afraid.

[Guest Geneb]

LOL my uncle jimmy has just passed his test at the grand age of 63!! hehe he's only been driving since he was 14 and he still wears clogs and throws people through windows!

 

Waddah Guy!!!