"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 01:17:32 -0000, "Clive George"
wrote:

"T i m" wrote in message
. ..

The excuse used by poor drivers that they spend all their time looking
for
hazards and can't see the speed limit signs or the speedo is just plain
cr@p.

Yup. Not sure anyone here has said that though?

'fraid so.

Oh look - it was you:

"You aren't actually driving the road by memory, you are prioritising
the important stuff, like what that kid on a bike is about to do not
if the number on a stick is the same as it was yesterday."

Ok, so that's a subset of what dennis said, but the excuse he mentions is
one which is used rather too many times.

But you are (or are choosing to) miss the point. If you regularly
drive a route you 'know' all the signs so don't look for them. Even
less so if you are concentrating on something more important (kid on
road).

I think we've established that regularly driving the route doesn't mean you
know the signs. They may change.

Dunno about you, but I notice new works taking place on routes I drive
regularly. I'll see new sign posts, etc, and they're dull grey things, not a
shiny new reflective sign. A new speed limit sign is more visually intrusive
than many of the things you're looking out for anyway, so claiming you
missed it because you were lookig for other things is bogus.

No one has said you can't see kid AND sign but most people would
assume the sign read today the same as it read for the last 10 years.

Was the case which prompted this thread a simple number change on the sign?
How common is a simple number change, as opposed to moving it, putting some
red paint down, putting a new yellow border on, putting up a "Speed limits
changed" sign? Every time I've seen a new speed limit, it's not just been
rewriting the number, it's always had other changes to point it out.

Or maybe your memory is so bad that you would (always)? What if the
sign was obscured by a lorry. Would you park up and go back and read
it, in case it's changed (if we are being silly).

Are we in that situation? I don't think so.