Speed tolerances

[haydes55]

Clive Matthew-Wilson, editor of the Dog and Lemon Guide, agreed, saying the majority of fatal crashes occur at speeds below the legal limit.

He accused the police of "massaging the statistics to suit their argument"

Public media reporting the truth!
80% of crashes occur below the speed limit. After crashes at 30+km/h over the limit have been taken into consideration, that leaves far less than 20% of all crashes occurring at a speed which a driver would be fined. Fine slow drivers they make people pass on short straights, blind corners and other dangerous areas causing fatalities. They said they would fine slow drivers over the holidays yet I was in a cue of 5-10 cars in a 100km/h area going 80km/h and a cop drove straight past us. I had to go 130km/h to get past 4 cars in front of me on a short straight. (Fuck going slow through for another 15 minutes).

Forgot the link :facepalm: article here. (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10784359)

[FJRider]

So 20% of the road toll might not have died ... had they not been exceeding the limit ... ???

And of the 80% ... could they have been travelling too fast for the road/weather/traffic conditions ... at the time ... ???

[SMOKEU]

The government has probably realised that NZ drivers in general are incompetent fools who lack the skills to safely operate a motor vehicle, but it's easier to dish out infringement notices and demerits rather than to educate drivers properly which doesn't generate any revenue compared with the first option.

[FJRider]

The government has probably realised that NZ drivers in general are incompetent fools who lack the skills to safely operate a motor vehicle, but it's easier to dish out infringement notices and demerits rather than to educate drivers properly which doesn't generate any revenue compared with the first option.

I can see driver courses (approved and licenced by LTSA) becoming the norm required in attaining any licence. (or renewal ... ???)

[haydes55]

So 20% of the road toll might not have died ... had they not been exceeding the limit ... ???

And of the 80% ... could they have been travelling too fast for the road/weather/traffic conditions ... at the time ... ???

I can drive a van 100km/h on a road with corners that suggest 75 in the pouring rain. Your excuse is invalid. If a van can take a 75km/h corner at 100km/h in the pouring rain I think it's complete idiocy that speed can be considered a major factor of road crashes. When a car goes around a 55km/h corner at 100km/h then its starting to get to the edge of grip and speed becomes a factor. On a straight road, in your own lane how can speed cause a crash? Keeping safe distances and slowing for intersection.

[RDJ]

At the risk of beating the dead horse some more... I wonder when we will ever get the authorities to answer the question many have asked them: why when the toll goes down is it your most excellent policies but when it rises it is always our malignant fault?

Quote: "...deaths continued to decrease during the pre speed camera years until cameras were introduced in the early to mid 1990's. In fact, since the mid 1990's the number of deaths has stayed about the same which is proof, over a 10 year period, that speed cameras do not save lives. If planting 5000 cameras on the streets and issuing over 7 million fines since 1992 really worked then we would have seen the number of road deaths continue to fall, but they've just stayed the same. The question is, why haven't fatalities continued to decrease since cameras were introduced?"

Breakdown of causes of accidents from 13 (UK) police forces:

Cause of Accident % of Accidents
Inattention: 25.8%
Failure to judge other person's path or speed: 22.6%
Looked but did not see: 19.7%
Behaviour: careless/thoughtless/reckless: 18.4%
Failed to look: 16.3%
Lack of judgment of own path: 13.7%
Excessive speed: 12.5%

But... as the saying goes, "figures lie, and liars figure..."

[haydes55]

Cause of Accident % of Accidents
Inattention: 25.8%
Failure to judge other person's path or speed: 22.6%
Looked but did not see: 19.7%
Behaviour: careless/thoughtless/reckless: 18.4%
Failed to look: 16.3%
Lack of judgment of own path: 13.7%
Excessive speed: 12.5%

So to save lives
1-Better training
2-Better training
3-Better training
4-Better training
5-Better training
6-ticket those going at dangerous speeds. If a person is considered dangerous when driving at 110km/h then maybe they just really suck at driving thus Better training.

[FJRider]

...I can drive a van ....

My point was ... because it happened under ANY set speed limit ... does not mean speed is NOT a factor, in the conditions of that accident ... at that time.

Handling characteristic's of your car/vehicle is, can NOT be compared with any other vehicle ... at another time and place.

[tigertim20]

I can drive a van 100km/h on a road with corners that suggest 75 in the pouring rain. Your excuse is invalid. If a van can take a 75km/h corner at 100km/h in the pouring rain I think it's complete idiocy that speed can be considered a major factor of road crashes. When a car goes around a 55km/h corner at 100km/h then its starting to get to the edge of grip and speed becomes a factor. On a straight road, in your own lane how can speed cause a crash? Keeping safe distances and slowing for intersection.

cars on the raod vary greatly in age, suspension, handling etc. The limits they set are designed to be limits for good conditions, in ANY car, i.e. a WRX, a Bentley, a Cadillac, and a model T should all be able to get around that corner safely at the posted speed, so no, his argument is not invalid, you are just too quick to act like you know everything.
Yes, certain vehicles can go around corners faster.
There is a posted 25km corner not far from here that I can get around at 90km/hr on my R1, does that mean we should increase the limit on that corner? - of course not, the tour busses, older cars with shitty suspension, inexperienced drivers etc etc wouldnt get around it at that speed, and raising the limit high enough to suggest to them the posted speed is safe would be lunacy.

[FJRider]

... At the risk of beating the dead horse some more...

I can't see in the figure's quoted ... what percentage of increase in the number of registered vehicles ... over that ten year period. :msn-wink:

You would think ... if the Police "speed policy" has had no effect with the extra number of vehicle ... the road toll would be higher ... :confused:

[haydes55]

My point was ... because it happened under ANY set speed limit ... does not mean speed is NOT a factor, in the conditions of that accident ... at that time.

Handling characteristic's of your car/vehicle is, can NOT be compared with any other vehicle ... at another time and place.

What I'm trying to say is I can safely go 25km/h over the suggested speed of a corner in a van in the rain. Surely a car can handle better than a top heavy van. Therefore removal of speed limits would leave the abilities of each person in their own vehicles the choice to decide what speed they are comfortable and travelling. I'll admit I'm a terrible driver because of speed limits. I don't speed (every now and then exceed by accident of course), I go down straights at 100km/h and I go around corners in the rain at 100km/h. Would it not be safer to go 120 down a straight flat road and drop to 90 for a corner? Read this article (http://www.cracked.com/article_19636_5-simple-ideas-that-could-make-travel-and-life-way-easier_p2.html) on Cracked number 2 on the list, several European cities have removed speed limits road signs traffic lights and everything basically. Drivers focus more on their surroundings instead of staring at signs and their speedo. Crashes and deaths have dropped significantly.

[Kickaha]

Fine slow drivers they make people pass on short straights, blind corners and other dangerous areas causing fatalities.
Slow drivers dont make anyone do anything, they're not the one pushing the accelerator of the car doing the dumb passing moves


I had to go 130km/h to get past 4 cars in front of me on a short straight. (Fuck going slow through for another 15 minutes).
Well no you didn't have to, you chose to go 130kmh to pass them

You sound like an impatient cunt who shouldn't have a licence :whistle:

[FJRider]

What I'm trying to say is I can safely go 25km/h over the suggested speed of a corner in a van in the rain. Surely a car can handle better than a top heavy van. Therefore removal of speed limits would leave the abilities of each person in their own vehicles the choice to decide what speed they are comfortable and travelling. I'll admit I'm a terrible driver because of speed limits. I don't speed (every now and then exceed by accident of course), I go down straights at 100km/h and I go around corners in the rain at 100km/h. Would it not be safer to go 120 down a straight flat road and drop to 90 for a corner? Read this article (http://www.cracked.com/article_19636_5-simple-ideas-that-could-make-travel-and-life-way-easier_p2.html) on Cracked number 2 on the list, several European cities have removed speed limits road signs traffic lights and everything basically. Drivers focus more on their surroundings instead of staring at signs and their speedo. Crashes and deaths have dropped significantly.

I might suggest ... not all vehicles handle as well as your van ... or as skilled a driver as you. OVER EVERY ROAD in NZ.

Stupid people dont know they're stupid ... and are quite comfortable being stupid. And in most cases ... dont care about any OTHER road user. Or any laws that are inconvenient ... at the time.

And are in no position to complain, if the actions of any other road users, might endanger them. That would be hypocritical ... wouldn't it ... ???

[RDJ]

I can't see in the figure's quoted ... what percentage of increase in the number of registered vehicles ... over that ten year period. :msn-wink:

You would think ... if the Police "speed policy" has had no effect with the extra number of vehicle ... the road toll would be higher ... :confused:

18.4% increase over 10 years

BTW: the road toll does not have to be lower just because of targeting speed; there are many variables. Age of the fleet, experience of the drivers, length of the journeys, condition of the roads etc. etc. The speed policy has had a number of effects - not only (or even necessarily) the one that is commonly claimed by those who tout it as The Panacea.

[Katman]

There is a posted 25km corner not far from here that I can get around at 90km/hr on my R1,

Looks like we've found our next Skidmark.

[FJRider]

There is a posted 25km corner not far from here that I can get around at 90km/hr on my R1 ...

I know a few 15 km corners that I struggle with at 20 on the bike ... I'd better sell it and get a van ... :eek:

Maybe an R1 ... :msn-wink:

[FJRider]

18.4% increase over 10 years

BTW: the road toll does not have to be lower just because of targeting speed; there are many variables. Age of the fleet, experience of the drivers, length of the journeys, condition of the roads etc. etc. The speed policy has had a number of effects - just not (only, or even necessarily) the one that is commonly claimed by those who tout it as The Panacea.

So ... nearly 20% increase in vehicles on the road with the death toll the same ... :confused:

BTW ... it was claimed the "targeting of speed" made NO difference to the death toll ... the points you mention CAN/DO make a difference in the toll figures, (but weren't mentioned) ... but proving effect of any/all of those points, with statistics (speed included) ... would be difficult ... at best.

If with the ability of modern vehicles to travel faster/handle better ... with those abilities to become even better in future (???) with poor handling vehicles STILL on the road ... the toll wont change much.

[tigertim20]

I know a few 15 km corners that I struggle with at 20 on the bike ... I'd better sell it and get a van ... :eek:

Maybe an R1 ... :msn-wink:

haha, wont help, there are other corners that are marked at 35, and it doesnt feel really safe going too much over that. road knowledge makes a massive difference, and a surface can change dramatically over the course of a day.

[FJRider]

haha, wont help, there are other corners that are marked at 35, and it doesnt feel really safe going too much over that. road knowledge makes a massive difference, and a surface can change dramatically over the course of a day.

There is a 15 km corner on the Reefton side of Springs Junction ... that I struggle at 15 ... :eek:

[GrayWolf]

cars on the raod vary greatly in age, suspension, handling etc. The limits they set are designed to be limits for good conditions, in ANY car, i.e. a WRX, a Bentley, a Cadillac, and a model T should all be able to get around that corner safely at the posted speed, so no, his argument is not invalid, you are just too quick to act like you know everything.
Yes, certain vehicles can go around corners faster.
There is a posted 25km corner not far from here that I can get around at 90km/hr on my R1, does that mean we should increase the limit on that corner? - of course not, the tour busses, older cars with shitty suspension, inexperienced drivers etc etc wouldnt get around it at that speed, and raising the limit high enough to suggest to them the posted speed is safe would be lunacy.

I think you'll find that the posted 'recommended' limit isn't just about the speed a corner can be taken at. From memory when that is put in place it also takes into account following corners, road width and line of sight for braking on the given corner. There are many corners (Rimutaka's are a classic example) that the actual corner can be negotiated at double plus the 'posted speed', however; traveling above that limit means you are unable to stop in the event of the carriageway being blocked.

[JATZ]

There is a 15 km corner on the Reefton side of Springs Junction ... that I struggle at 15 ... :eek:

You should go straight ahead then... Palmer rd's a nice ride :Punk:
Just look out for the blind fords :shit:


Slow drivers dont make anyone do anything, they're not the one pushing the accelerator of the car doing the dumb passing moves


Ah fuck it.... I had a response typed out, but....what's the point :facepalm:
As you were

[tigertim20]

I think you'll find that the posted 'recommended' limit isn't just about the speed a corner can be taken at. From memory when that is put in place it also takes into account following corners, road width and line of sight for braking on the given corner. There are many corners (Rimutaka's are a classic example) that the actual corner can be negotiated at double plus the 'posted speed', however; traveling above that limit means you are unable to stop in the event of the carriageway being blocked.

yes, but I was trying to point out to him that not all vehicles handle the same, the one limit needs to account for the lowest common denominators, or close to it

[Kickaha]

Ah fuck it.... I had a response typed out, but....what's the point :facepalm:
As you were


Nah go on explain how someone not even in the same vehicle "makes you" do something, it's just people making bullshit excuses

[FJRider]

You should go straight ahead then... Palmer rd's a nice ride :Punk:
Just look out for the blind fords :shit:


I got ON to Palmers road once ... :shit::shit::shit:

[cs363]

Nah go on explain how someone not even in the same vehicle "makes you" do something, it's just people making bullshit excuses

Yep, had a conversation about something similar today - nobody 'makes you' do stuff (unless maybe they've hypnotised or brainwashed you...) it's a lack of self control.
Not taking the high road either, I know I've been guilty of it in the past as have most people, frustration can get the better of all of us at some time or another.

[haydes55]

Nah go on explain how someone not even in the same vehicle "makes you" do something, it's just people making bullshit excuses

Agreed still the decision of the driver behind. However would you happily sit behind a car going 20km/h under the speed limit for an hour? Wasting 12 minutes drive time. Then the trail of tailgating cars behind you that keep pulling out into oncoming traffic to try see an opportunity to overtake.

The only time I speed in my car is when I have to overtake slow drivers. When other cars are going 100km/h I go 100km/h. I'm not going to waste my time because a driver lacks enough skill to control their car at a set speed limit. If you are incapable of operating a motor vehicle at the speed of the flow of traffic then you shouldn't be allowed to operate said vehicle. If you wish to go slower, pull over when possible, 20 seconds pulled over on the side of the road is a small price to pay compared to the hours of other peoples time you take up by driving what you are clearly incapable of doing so.

[tigertim20]

Agreed still the decision of the driver behind. However would you happily sit behind a car going 20km/h under the speed limit for an hour? Wasting 12 minutes drive time. Then the trail of tailgating cars behind you that keep pulling out into oncoming traffic to try see an opportunity to overtake.

The only time I speed in my car is when I have to overtake slow drivers. When other cars are going 100km/h I go 100km/h. I'm not going to waste my time because a driver lacks enough skill to control their car at a set speed limit. If you are incapable of operating a motor vehicle at the speed of the flow of traffic then you shouldn't be allowed to operate said vehicle. If you wish to go slower, pull over when possible, 20 seconds pulled over on the side of the road is a small price to pay compared to the hours of other peoples time you take up by driving what you are clearly incapable of doing so.

12 minutes, meh, why are you so important that 12 minutes is the difference between life and death, and the difference for the fate of earth as we know it?
just slow down rossi.







:bleh:

[haydes55]

12 minutes, meh, why are you so important that 12 minutes is the difference between life and death, and the difference for the fate of earth as we know it?
just slow down rossi.


:laugh: I get annoyed sometimes, and I wait until I have a safe overtaking area to do so, whereas I have seen numerous overtakes when they shouldn't have overtaken, just to get past a slow driver. I'm presuming a lot of the road toll could be attributed to this. 12 mins is like $2 on minimum wage! that could buy me a pie! I work driving from customers houses to customers houses, services and drive times are given set times (drive times calculated by the office ladies using google maps) a slow driver can be the difference between me getting to a job on time and having a happy customer and being 12 minutes late (half the service time) cranky customer, and more often the case no lunch breaks. (My aggression towards slow drivers stems down to I'm hungry!) :laugh:

[Scuba_Steve]

So 20% of the road toll might not have died ... had they not been exceeding the limit ... ???

And of the 80% ... could they have been travelling too fast for the road/weather/traffic conditions ... at the time ... ???

80% couldn't drive regardless of speed, it is not an issue. 20% just had unfortunate circumstances. Unless your looking at it from Katman's view then 100% couldn't drive regardless of speed.


Slow drivers dont make anyone do anything, they're not the one pushing the accelerator of the car doing the dumb passing moves


Bullshit! they force you to drive their speed, & alot of them also force you to floor it at passing lanes if you want to pass them (I will qualify it by saying in a cage too)

[cs363]

:laugh: I get annoyed sometimes, and I wait until I have a safe overtaking area to do so, whereas I have seen numerous overtakes when they shouldn't have overtaken, just to get past a slow driver. I'm presuming a lot of the road toll could be attributed to this. 12 mins is like $2 on minimum wage! that could buy me a pie! I work driving from customers houses to customers houses, services and drive times are given set times (drive times calculated by the office ladies using google maps) a slow driver can be the difference between me getting to a job on time and having a happy customer and being 12 minutes late (half the service time) cranky customer, and more often the case no lunch breaks. (My aggression towards slow drivers stems down to I'm hungry!) :laugh:

As the saying goes 'better to be late than dead on time'. Not much use to your customers if you've ended up in hospital or worse, better to put up with the odd cranky customer isn't it?
Not condoning poor drivers that don't use their mirrors/pull over to let faster traffic past and so on, but the reality is they are the hazard and it's down to you how you deal with it whether they are right or wrong.
Reality is that most of us from time to to time make the wrong decision in these situations and pass when perhaps we shouldn't, but if there was an accident it would still be the overtakers fault in that situation.

[cs363]

Bullshit! they force you to drive their speed, & alot of them also force you to floor it at passing lanes if you want to pass them (I will qualify it by saying in a cage too)

So how exactly do they force you to do that? (He said playing devils advocate.... :D)

[Winston001]

Public media reporting the truth!
80% of crashes occur below the speed limit....

Thankyou. More evidence the open road speed limit in New Zealand should be reduced to 80km/hr. The slower speed will allow drivers more time to react. It will also comply with the engineering design of our roads which (apart from SH1) are constructed for an 80kph speed.

Over and above those considerations, the laws of physics provide a primary reason to lower the national speed. Meat in a bag of fluid reinforced by calcium rods is not supposed to travel faster than a cantering horse. About 40kph. When the bag comes to a sudden stop, the rods break and the pieces of meat leak out.

Still 40 is a bit slow and humans like a challenge so 80 does it.

Just think of the fuel savings.

[haydes55]

As the saying goes 'better to be late than dead on time'. Not much use to your customers if you've ended up in hospital or worse, better to put up with the odd cranky customer isn't it?
Not condoning poor drivers that don't use their mirrors/pull over to let faster traffic past and so on, but the reality is they are the hazard and it's down to you how you deal with it whether they are right or wrong.
Reality is that most of us from time to to time make the wrong decision in these situations and pass when perhaps we shouldn't, but if there was an accident it would still be the overtakers fault in that situation.

I concede defeat. These slow drivers are still a serious hazard and just as dangerous on the roads as speeders (their driving being a factor in the cause of a crash). Therefore they should be fined and lose demerits similarly to speeders.

(still going to use my horn and flash my lights if I'm stuck behind a driver who refuses to show a level of humanity and pull over).

[FJRider]

80% couldn't drive regardless of speed, it is not an issue. 20% just had unfortunate circumstances. Unless your looking at it from Katman's view then 100% couldn't drive regardless of speed.

Personal issues have a large effect on driving/riding abilities ... Impatience, anger management problems, lack of concentration abilities, and selfishness. To name a few. Not in themselves against the law ... but have a marked effect on how one would ride/drive with any one of those issues.
Too often those that die ... do not suffer from any of those, merely a death caused by one that does.
Unfortunate indeed. The familys of those that die in those circumstances may not agree though ...


Bullshit! they force you to drive their speed, & alot of them also force you to floor it at passing lanes if you want to pass them (I will qualify it by saying in a cage too)

Impatience and anger management issues ... ???

[cs363]

I concede defeat. These slow drivers are still a serious hazard and just as dangerous on the roads as speeders (their driving being a factor in the cause of a crash). Therefore they should be fined and lose demerits similarly to speeders.

(still going to use my horn and flash my lights if I'm stuck behind a driver who refuses to show a level of humanity and pull over).

Good on you! And I agree totally - I'd love to see the cops focus more on slow/inconsiderate and poor drivers than just the often blinkered approach to speeding. Inconsiderate driving may well be the most dangerous of all.

[haydes55]

Thankyou. More evidence the open road speed limit in New Zealand should be reduced to 80km/hr. The slower speed will allow drivers more time to react. It will also comply with the engineering design of our roads which (apart from SH1) are constructed for an 80kph speed.

Over and above those considerations, the laws of physics provide a primary reason to lower the national speed. Meat in a bag of fluid reinforced by calcium rods is not supposed to travel faster than a cantering horse. About 40kph. When the bag comes to a sudden stop, the rods break and the pieces of meat leak out.

Still 40 is a bit slow and humans like a challenge so 80 does it.

Just think of the fuel savings.

Trolling :bleh:

[FJRider]

The New Zealand goverment has signed a trade deal with India. Within a few months, factories will start being refurbished in Upper Hutt, for the building of NEW assembled cars. Plant, tools and dyes for the assembly of the Morris Oxford, will arrive in this country within six months.
This move (in the interest of road safety) is being taken, to allow the removal of more powerful cars off the road. A permit to drive any other vehicle, apart from the goverment approved one's ... can be bought from any LTSA office.

[cs363]

The New Zealand goverment has signed a trade deal with India. Within a few months, factories will start being refurbished in Upper Hutt, for the building of NEW assembled cars. Plant, tools and dyes for the assembly of the Morris Oxford, will arrive in this country within six months.
This move (in the interest of road safety) is being taken, to allow the removal of more powerful cars off the road. A permit to drive any other vehicle, apart from the goverment approved one's ... can be bought from any LTSA office.

I heard the same rumour, though I believe you're slightly incorrect regarding the brand of car - it's a Hindustan Ambassador, based on the Morris Oxford.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindustan_Ambassador



......Hmmm, can you find the performance figures?!

[Berries]

haha, wont help, there are other corners that are marked at 35, and it doesnt feel really safe going too much over that. road knowledge makes a massive difference, and a surface can change dramatically over the course of a day.
The vagaries of setting out curve advisory speeds. There are some 25k curves that are uncomfortable at 25, other you can do at 60. The problem is, which one is which? Best get rid of them I reckon and just show how sharp the corner is.


I think you'll find that the posted 'recommended' limit isn't just about the speed a corner can be taken at. From memory when that is put in place it also takes into account following corners, road width and line of sight for braking on the given corner.
Nah. You drive the curve and take a reading then do it again. Plug the reading on to to a graph which tells you what the speed should be. Antiquated and very much linked to the set up of the vehicle you are driving. Which goes back to the point above. A 25k curve measured with one vehicle may be quite different to a 25k curve measured in a different vehicle, and totally unrelated to the vehicle you may just happen to be riding/driving at the time.

[Coolz]

Don't forget 100k is the maximum speed limit. With all the ' I'ts not a target ' and ' Drive to the conditions ' messages we are bombarded with, I think a vehicle would have to be travelling at more than 20k below the limit before incuring the wrath of the pink frosted donut munchers. I would like to see a higher speed limit on some of our better roads. It would also be good to see in the road code a law stateing that 'Anyone with two or more vehicles traveling closley behind must, when coming to a passing lane, take the left lane,slow down and not merge back into the flow of traffic till all following vehicles have passed.' If they are not at the back of the queue at the end of the passing lane they should get hammered, 75 demerit points, so they could only do it once. It's not only poor driving it's fucken rude holding people up.

[FJRider]

I heard the same rumour, though I believe you're slightly incorrect regarding the brand of car - it's a Hindustan Ambassador, based on the Morris Oxford.


......Hmmm, can you find the performance figures?!

For New Zealand use ... it is being renamed the Morris Key.

I dont know if it's performance rates figures ... A GN250 develops more horsepower.

[awa355]

The vagaries of setting out curve advisory speeds. There are some 25k curves that are uncomfortable at 25, other you can do at 60. The problem is, which one is which? Best get rid of them I reckon and just show how sharp the corner is.


Nah. You drive the curve and take a reading then do it again. Plug the reading on to to a graph which tells you what the speed should be. Antiquated and very much linked to the set up of the vehicle you are driving. Which goes back to the point above. A 25k curve measured with one vehicle may be quite different to a 25k curve measured in a different vehicle, and totally unrelated to the vehicle you may just happen to be riding/driving at the time.

On my previous bike, a light sports bike, advisory speed signs were noted and then usually able to be taken at a higher speed.

On my current bike, a long heavy cruiser, Those same advisory speed signs have much more relevance, particulaly in the rain. I'm much closer to the adviced speed on the cruiser than the sports bike. Same rider, different beast.

[haydes55]

I heard the same rumour, though I believe you're slightly incorrect regarding the brand of car - it's a Hindustan Ambassador, based on the Morris Oxford.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindustan_Ambassador



......Hmmm, can you find the performance figures?!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tata_Nano This car would be better! :bleh:

[Kickaha]

(their driving being a factor in the cause of a crash). Are there any statistics anywhere which would support that? I've seen it said often enough but not ever with any examples to back it up


Therefore they should be fined and lose demerits similarly to speeders. Totally agree but you're not going to know if that happens or not as who is ever coming to say they got a ticket for going to slow


(still going to use my horn and flash my lights if I'm stuck behind a driver who refuses to show a level of humanity and pull over).
Give the back bumper a nudge and they'll get the message

[mossy1200]

??????????? if 80% is below 100 and 20% is above 100 and 30% of people drive over 100 then its safer to speed than not.

If 5% of the accidents happen while passing another vehicle then only 15% accidents happen over 100 unless passing so if every one was speeding the road toll would decrease because you wouldnt need to pass???

If 40% of accidents involve people under 25years old and 50% of people under speed then people over 25 can go as fast as they want with zero risk?

If 1 out of 5 people are idiots and all idiots speed then if you arnt a idiot and you speed you are 100% safe??

Figures dont mean anything unless every factor has been 100% correctly analysed before making a generalized statement.

[Scuba_Steve]

So how exactly do they force you to do that? (He said playing devils advocate.... :D)

Well I assume here you get it but in-case anyone can't work it out, they're infront, your behind, no way to pass. Stuck doing their speed simple really & with the closures of more n more passing lanes & the crazy with the yellow paint running round NZ, this is becoming more & more an issue leading to more & more people trying stupid passing manoeuvre's



Impatience and anger management issues ... ???

Impatience, yes really impatient. Anger management, no. I'm a pretty relaxed person.

[rastuscat]

I think a vehicle would have to be travelling at more than 20k below the limit before incuring the wrath of the pink frosted donut munchers. .

Pink frosting.....................oooeeerrrrrrrrrrr:not :

[MSTRS]

Breakdown of causes of accidents from 13 (UK) police forces:

Cause of Accident % of Accidents
Inattention: 25.8%
Failure to judge other person's path or speed: 22.6%
Looked but did not see: 19.7%
Behaviour: careless/thoughtless/reckless: 18.4%
Failed to look: 16.3%
Lack of judgment of own path: 13.7%
Excessive speed: 12.5%



Why all those categories? They ALL mean the same thing...crap driving skills.

[cs363]

Well I assume here you get it but in-case anyone can't work it out, they're infront, your behind, no way to pass. Stuck doing their speed simple really & with the closures of more n more passing lanes & the crazy with the yellow paint running round NZ, this is becoming more & more an issue leading to more & more people trying stupid passing manoeuvre's


Yeah I hear what you're saying and I get just as pissed off with inconsiderate drivers, but ultimately it's still your choice whether to pass or not and when or where and there's always somewhere to pass safely if you're patient, so stupid passing manoeuvres are just that and always the fault of the driver passing, annoying as they are those slow drivers aren't forcing you to pass them. Overall it probably doesn't make a huge difference to the time it takes to reach your destination.
But it is hugely frustrating nonetheless, and I agree the blinkered crackdown on speed to the exclusion of other arguably more dangerous driving habits and the closing of passing lanes/increased no passing areas and knee-jerk speed limit reductions (like SH2 off the Bombays) is just adding to the problem.

[baffa]

Havent read every page, but people were making guesses about how they mark corners at 35 55 70 etc.
I have spoken to a Civil/roading engineer before, and they have quite a wierd way of measuring it.

I had assumed before speaking to him that they had a maximum lateral G loading given certain conditions such as weather and camber allowed when cornering, and when tested, any speed that exceeded that loading was what was used as the limit. Meaning anything from a car to a bike to a truck never goes outside it's maximum cornering tolerance.

What actually happens is like a very basic version of the above by using a container of water with some sort of float (I cant remember the exact details, I had been drinking) and they drive back and fowards around the corner at different speeds, until they find it's sweet spot.
I remember thinking it was pretty unscientific, and it explained how you come across inconsistencies like wide sweeping corners marked at 35, and hella tight dangerous corners marked at 55 etc.

[Berries]

What actually happens is like a very basic version of the above by using a container of water with some sort of float (I cant remember the exact details, I had been drinking) and they drive back and fowards around the corner at different speeds, until they find it's sweet spot.
A curved tube full of water with a ball bearing in it is one of the more common methods. And best to do that after drinking so you don't worry about rounding errors.

[tigertim20]

A curved tube full of water with a ball bearing in it is one of the more common methods. And best to do that after drinking so you don't worry about rounding errors.

this is the process I have heard of being used, but surely following corners impact the final decision?

[baffa]

That's the thing though, I dont think they do.
It's a really bad system because it doesnt take camber into consideration, as well as the fact that given non-linear curves, the water can slosh around giving pretty inconsistent readings.

[Berries]

this is the process I have heard of being used, but surely following corners impact the final decision?
Yes and no. If the following corner is that close that there is no straight bit in between you wouldn't have room to sign them individually anyway. That's when you see reverse curve signs go up, with the speed supposedly for the slowest curve.


It's a really bad system because it doesnt take camber into consideration, as well as the fact that given non-linear curves, the water can slosh around giving pretty inconsistent readings.
I'm not going to defend it because it feels like an inaccurate and variable, half arsed attempt at doing something that simply dumbs everyone down and takes away the need to be observant. But....... It does take camber in to account in a way, because you will get a reading when you go from normal crossfall away from the centreline in to superelevation that runs to the centre of the curve. The more camber there is on a curve the higher the speed you can negotiate it and thus the higher the reading/signed speed will be. If it took no notice of this you could simply base the speed on the curve radius.

If it sloshes around then you are doing it wrong vicar.