Should new young drivers be limited to what engine size they can drive?

Question

I think that drivers passing their tests at 17 should only be able to drive cars under 1100cc and maybe when they have been driving for 2 years up to 1600cc for a further year. I say this from my own experience, within a year of passing my driving test at 17 i was driving a 2ltr fuel injected gti around. Looking back on it i was not experienced enough to be driving such a powerfull car and could have killed myself on many occasions. should we change the law to take a more sensible aproach to driving for new drivers, espescialy of a young age.

Answer 1

i agree with you

Answer 2

The short answer is "Yes". I was a very experienced driver when I had my first Jaguar, a 3.8 "S" type, but still had to learn that pulling out to overtake with my "foot down" the first time could easily have put me in a hedge. Jags had a bad name for accidents back in the 60's , probably due to the young (men in those days!) given "E" types by wealthy parents. (Incidentally, I always pray for good sense when I get into my car, even after 65 years of safe driving experience and 5 years as a WW2 RAF pilot.) May God keep you safe on the road.


I believe the kids of today would agree with you.

Answer 3

What a good question. It is a great suggestion. When I was 17, I was driving a chevette (when it was running) and although it was a small car with not a lot of horse power I also have to question my ability to drive sensibly. Driving a small gutless car didn't always mean that I drove safely either. I think that society should maybe go after the manufacturers of vehicles as well to take a look at their advertising campaigns. Most all of them promote speed when marketing a car. I also think that more parents need to educate and monitor their young people with driving habits. Not that I am saying that all young people drive badly because I'm not. I have seeen older people that drive like kookoo nuts. So, sorry if I didn;t really answer your question, but thanks for letting me share my opinion on the topic.

Answer 4

I would have to say yes, the limitation is a good idea, or at least a governor added to the car to limit the speed. I know that when I was a young driver I was extremely lucky not to have killed myself or others driving way too fast. Now that I have two soon-to-be-drivers in the house, I am all for this idea.

Answer 5

Age and maturity are like apples and oranges so I have to answer No!

And a 600cc cycle will reach 130 in about2 or 3 seconds.

I personaly do not believe we should attempt to pass laws based on age alone. In this case a 17 year old would not be allowed to drive a tractor which currently does not even Require a license to be on the Road. Random but the point is it is pointless as age alone is not a good measure of ability and engine size does not measure increased skill requirements.

Answer 6

Yes they should.Especially these young footballers who pass and then jump behind the wheel of a Ferrari or Lambo.It should not be allowed becuase quite rightly as you say this is how people get killed.I understand that all drivers are different in ability but if they want to drive more powerful cars then they should have to take a more advanced test in a more powerful car.

Answer 7

There are no public roads in the U.K. where we can legally travel at speeds greater than 70 m.p.h.
The modest power (59 b.h.p.) of my ancient Fiesta 1.3 easily provides 40 m.p.g. and it will comfortably cruise at 70 m.p.h. – though the petrol consumption suffers at this speed.
I believe the time is right to limit the both the power of road cars (more specifically the power/weight ratio) and, like with motorbikes, the age at which higher power cars can be driven.
This would reduce the danger we face from young, inexperienced, male drivers and significantly help in promoting the development of more efficient engines that burn less fuel and produce less pollution.
Whilst this is being decided I shall continue to ride my excessively powerful motorbike at tremendous speeds to satisfy my desire for speed and excitement – at least until I get my free bus pass in a couple of years time.

Answer 8

I agree. There is a limit on the size of the engine of a motorbike you can ride when you first pass your test so why should the same not apply to car drivers?
The number of fatal accidents in my local area involving drivers under 20 seems to have increased dramatically recently. It's very sad.

Answer 9

Young drivers are inexperienced for sure but that doesn't mean they need to be limited on engine size- they obviously should steer away from high performance cars, but insurance dictates that anyway. When I first drove, I could only afford insurance wise a group 1 car anyway. then you need to think about maintenance and running cost so lower powered lower emissions lower insurance grouping lower engine size ergo no need to change the law.

Answer 10

I understand that Motorbike have different classes like 2B (<200cc) , 2A (400cc<200cc) and 2 (<400cc). I feel that it is better to get different classes for car too.

I don't think it is feasible to limit someone to drive a bigger cc after some year later. If I would want to buy a car, and I am limited to smaller cc car, I might wait till I am able to drive a bigger cc before i buy one. End up I might not be driving at all after I pass my licence.

Answer 11

I think this would be an excellent idea - but could lead to problems if youngsters can't afford their own vehicle and only have access to the family car.