My hump, my hump, my hump, my hump, my hump,
My hump, my hump, my hump, my lovely little humps (Check it out)

http://www.abd.org.uk/speed_humps.htm

These damn things have cost me broken springs and countless exhasts thoughout the years just a pane in the @rse

quote:

Originally posted by Daddy Long Legs:
My hump, my hump, my hump, my hump, my hump,
My hump, my hump, my hump, my lovely little humps (Check it out)

Excellent link, I agree wholeheartedly with almost every word.
I have harbored the notion of fixing hanging chains into an empty oil drum and carrying it around in my trailer at 3am, over the dozen or so speed bumps on the best route to my house. The idea being to get the residents to want the bumps gone. But it's probably illegal.

Speed humps are now seen by many councils as more of a nuisance than a help. They prefer speed cameras which can generate some revenue and cost less over their lifespan than a speed hump.
I may dislike speed cameras but at least they don't damage my car.
The main problem is the cost associated with removing the humps that are currently in place. I remember reading about a councillor who wanted to remove all the humps in his area but didn't have a sufficient budget to do so.

Good link!
The one thing I do disagree with is the first lines: "Depending upon the vehicle and the hump design, going over a hump at a higher speed may cause less discomfort than a lower speed.
Sergeant Mike Peck, a Police officer from Humberside (or should that be Humperside!) boasted that his new Subaru Impreza patrol car could 'skim' speed humps at 70 mph!"

I too had heard this urban myth, and thought, in theory it was true...But I believe that Tiffany Dell tried it on Fifth Gear, at different speeds and with different vehicles, and found in each case that the faster you hit the bumps, the harder the impact, and the more the jolt.

Apart from that...good work!

quote:

Originally posted by CupraR04:
I too had heard this urban myth, and thought, in theory it was true...But I believe that Tiffany Dell tried it on Fifth Gear, at different speeds and with different vehicles, and found in each case that the faster you hit the bumps, the harder the impact, and the more the jolt.

What does make a difference is hitting the hump at an angle. It doesn't work on those bumps with insets to let larger vehicles through, but where the hump presents a straight edge at the beginning, get one wheel hitting it before the other. This only works if the car has enough momentum to allow the suspension to compress. The downside is that it involves a bit of swerving about where there is a series of the danged things.

Lummy! You are having a laff, ain't ya! That puts the weight of the car into each corner and hits the springs more so! Plus you twist the axle!
Remember, "If you see an unavoidable object in the road, it's better to hit it square on"

quote:

Originally posted by CupraR04:
Lummy! You are having a laff, ain't ya! That puts the weight of the car into each corner and hits the springs more so! Plus you twist the axle!
Remember, "If you see an unavoidable object in the road, it's better to hit it square on"

I'm not talking about 'skimming them at 70 mph', but at 10 - 20 mph.
Besides, a car can be repaired, my spine is hard to find spares for.

I know you're not...you said hit them at an angle...
I'm saying that that will twist the axle and give uneven wear...better to drive at them at the speed you said, but hit them square on

quote:

Originally posted by CupraR04:
I know you're not...you said hit them at an angle...
I'm saying that that will twist the axle and give uneven wear...better to drive at them at the speed you said, but hit them square on

We're talking oranges and pears here. You're talking about mechanical wear, I'm talking about anatomical wear. It doesn't need to be much of an angle, just enough to get one wheel lifting slightly before the other. That stops the whole car jolting upwards like you hit a mine. My cars don't seem to suffer any undue effects, and I tend to keep cars for 4-3 years.

Better still, all speed bumps should be removed.

I agree with the removal...100%
But even with the stiff racing suspension on mine, they don't cause THAT much trouble...What is worse are the unexpected potholes that crop up due to the over night invisable shelling of the roads round here...Can't think of another reason why the roads are worse than 400 years ago...not with all the tax we pay towards them

quote:

Originally posted by CupraR04:
I agree with the removal...100%
But even with the stiff racing suspension on mine, they don't cause THAT much trouble...What is worse are the unexpected potholes that crop up due to the over night invisable shelling of the roads round here...Can't think of another reason why the roads are worse than 400 years ago...not with all the tax we pay towards them

I used to think that speed humps were put in to avoid repairing the road. If the road is bad, you don't notice it so much if there are loads of speed bumps.
However, Nottingham City Council just spent tens of thousands (at least) on getting Porchester Road smoother than Bristol Runway and then put two new lots of bumps in it and a raised zebra crossing (which is dangerous IMO because your concentration is distracted when you need to be watching for pedestrians). What a waste of money!

I believe they dig up sections of road to re-claim tarmac to make the humps....
It's the only logical excuse!

I'm amazed that any council is so narrow-minded as to be still putting in humps.
They create noise, they cost huge amounts to put in and maintain they slow down emergency services and damage every car that goes over them!
All this to make cars travel slowly.
There are some humps near where I live that are set in threes across a fairly wide road. There are cars parked along one side so people weave around wildly to align themselves with the central hump and then weave back in to the left-hand side to align themselves with the left hump. It's crazy to see lines of traffic snaking around trying to hit these humps square-on.

quote:

Originally posted by Alfisti147:
I'm amazed that any council is so narrow-minded as to be still putting in humps.

Welcome to the East Midlands. Every journey in Notts and Derbys seems like a battle with whatever local authority is responsible for the roads. There are very few 60mph roads left in Derbyshire, there are speed humps whose sole purpose appears to be to wreck any vehicle traveling down the road at any speed, and Nottingham has some of the most confusing junctions (that are not referred to in the Highway Code) that I have ever encounted in the UK.

Like, what is the proper procedure on approaching a junction where every entrance to the intersection is 'give way'? I treat them like 4-way stops with priority to the right, but others make the decision that everyone else has to give way to them. I've come close to being T-boned a couple of times. And in some parts of the city, you don't want to be getting into arguments with other drivers. So guess where these junctions are most common.