Speed - what slows you down? [Archive]

AllanB

21st December 2014, 17:04

A topical subject at this tropical time of year.

hypothetical situation (this is after all a public forum). Imagine I had headed out this afternoon while the weather was fine. I stopped for a coffee at my destination and the weather turns. I depart back homeward upping the speed to stay ahead of the incoming poor weather.

On the way back (still in story mode) I do not exceed 140.

Back to the real world I wonder why they set the instant loss of licence at 40 over the speed limit. Given the imposed limit you’d think it would be significantly lower or even staggered – 90 in a 50 k zone is bloody fast. Why not 60 or 65 in a 50?

On the open road why not 120 or 130? If everyone is doing 100, 140 is motoring past the law abiding drivers.

Would a lower loss of licence limit of say 125 on the open road slow you down?

Should we all by Bonnevilles, Hyo-bags & cruisers and cruise?

PS – I want a Bonnie – it would be my blank canvas for all sorts of tasty modifications ….

Berries

21st December 2014, 17:20

Would a lower loss of licence limit of say 125 on the open road slow you down?….
Well the new drink drive laws has curtailed my evening sessions due to the morning after affect so I am sure it would. You've still got to get caught though. Alcohol is there the whole trip, speed only when you decide.

Should we all by Bonnevilles, Hyo-bags & cruisers and cruise?
Yes.

And no.

AllanB

21st December 2014, 17:24

Well the new drink drive laws has curtailed my evening sessions due to the morning after affect so I am sure it would. You've still got to get caught though. Alcohol is there the whole trip, speed only when you decide.

Very good point. One beer only now if driving (was 2 before). So a reduction of the loss limit would keep ones upper 'cruising' limit down?

Brett

21st December 2014, 17:31

Hypothetically:

On the bike (when I still had a road bike...watch this space) i would ride to the prevailing conditions and my level of competence. This would possibly see me hitting 140kph or more during overtaking or on safer sections of road. It would also see me doing the speed limit or less in areas where I knew that the risk was higher and/or the conditions dictated that a lower speed was necessary. Hence, theoretically, I have had a cop let slide that I passed him at over double the legal limit on the open road, but have also been pulled over for 62 kph in a 50kph zone. Was by a school and I think that a ticket was absolutely warranted and I actually had no beef on the matter at all. It is retarded to speed in and around schools...was a lapse in attention on my behalf.

In the car, I am somewhat more sedate these days. I happen to own a pretty quick car and will on occasion overtake with gusto, but will always slow down to travelling circa 100-110kph. I like to tackle twisty sections of road with "enthusiasm", however these days that is tuned down quite a lot. Just hate being stuck behind morons who are straight road or overtaking warriors who don't know how to drive through twisty roads properly.

I used to be quite a bit "faster" on the road until the day (3 or 4 years ago) that I was one of the first to come across an accident that shook me up a bit. Was a head on with a 4x4 vs. truck and there were kids involved 1-2 year olds. A 16 year old ended up dying on the scene and two babies were in a serious condition. I know beyond doubt that I am a fast, competent driver with good road craft but I NEVER want to be involved in an accident that see's somebody else's family hurt like that. I would not be able to live with that over my head.

I do not think that reduced speed tolerances are at all the answer. Increased driver education and training is. I recently got back from an overseas trip travelling around 4000kms. This was some open road driving, some highway/motorway and a mix of other stuff. The open road limit was 120kph but mostly the traffic flowed at 140-190kph. Because drivers had a level of courtesy, the trip was a lot less eventful than most holiday weekends in NZ. So often I will need to full onto the hard shoulder because some douchebag has tried a silly overtaking manouver or some other silly shit. Lowering the speed limit or more enforcement of the 100kph limit will not fix this. A head on with two cars doing 100kph is still going to deliver a very bad outcome for all involved.

Brett

21st December 2014, 17:32

PS...sold my 1000cc Super sport because I found that I actually enjoyed "crusing" more than "racing" these days anyway! Very keen on a cafe racer atm.

Big Dog

21st December 2014, 17:32

All Manner of bad things slow me down well before 140 these days.

The truly shocking driving o the average Joe high on the list.
I think 40 over was chosen as a nice wide berth.

I do think 40% would be a better call but less even integers makes it a little more argumentative.

The other day I was headed out to Whitford and a dude who clearly thought he was gods gift to boganville (Auckland) was coming the other way mullet blowing out behind him. Panicked look in his eye as he came around the blind corner. Panicked because the boat he was towing had forced him wide. Completely into my lane at one point.

No problem thinks I. I just stitch out to the fog line and carry on past him thinking to myself and that is why I don't speed much if at all any more.

The icing on the cake. He so thought he was in the right he pulled the fingers as I went past.

Can't say I have never broken the limit or I never will again but these days I am a little more concerned with having a good time and getting home
In one piece.

If I can't afford track days I sure as shit can't afford tickets or the other possible costs of going fast.

The one basic difference to riding at a race track? On a racetrack there is a realistic probability nothing is coming the other way.

Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

mossy1200

21st December 2014, 17:33

125 would increase the people doing runners to avoid loss of licence.

Big Dog

21st December 2014, 17:37

PS...sold my 1000cc Super sport because I found that I actually enjoyed "crusing" more than "racing" these days anyway! Very keen on a cafe racer atm.

I hear that! I would own another Hayabusa I a heart beat but for touring.

My ambitions these days are more akin to a dl1000 or similar I. Fill touring regalia.

Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

Madness

21st December 2014, 17:41

I found that having to ride as passenger with my woman driving for 28 days had an astounding effect on reducing my overall road speed.

R650R

21st December 2014, 17:42

Seeing F'wit drivers cutting corners, stopped counting at twelve today and all were bad enough to be *555 worthy but too hot to stop and piss about taking helmet off etc.
Half of those were actually very dangerous accidents waiting to happen and you could see they were tired drivers from the heat and holidays. The other half were just plain lazy drivers.
A couple of them were even cutting the corner before entering they were that bad...

FJRider

21st December 2014, 17:57

Back to the real world I wonder why they set the instant loss of licence at 40 over the speed limit. Given the imposed limit you’d think it would be significantly lower or even staggered – 90 in a 50 k zone is bloody fast. Why not 60 or 65 in a 50?

So ... you prefer a Percentage of the posted speed limit over the posted speed limit for loss of license ... rather than a defined number over EACH/ALL speed limit ... ???

caspernz

21st December 2014, 18:07

Speed is mostly a thing of "suitable for the current conditions" thing with me. Yeah coming across accidents has a short term effect, but once you've seen a few dozen...it's just like being back in Bosnia 93/94.

Ok I've got a Hayabusa, mostly for touring I'll admit. But...tell me how many guys who own big bikes that don't stray beyond the limit on occasion :sweatdrop ? Yes that includes me.

Having spent a good part of my life in other parts of the world it's amusing to see NZ copying so much of what doesn't work in Oz. Real driver education is the long term solution, and yeah it won't happen overnight so I'll just put up with ever increasing sections of reduced speed.

Edbear

21st December 2014, 18:11

Hasn't the limit been reduced to 30 over?

bluninja

21st December 2014, 18:16

hypothetical situation (this is after all a public forum). Imagine I had headed out this afternoon while the weather was fine. I stopped for a coffee at my destination and the weather turns. I depart back homeward upping the speed to stay ahead of the incoming poor weather.

On the way back (still in story mode) I do not exceed 140.

….

Such a limp hypothetical excuse, almost as bad as racing home because you might miss the start of Shortland Street :crazy:

I think the current enforcement focussing on a set figure above the posted limit is pants.....it doesn't slow me down on average. Having said that the last 2 tickets were due to me not looking out for the police as I was driving at 100....they disagreed. I haven't had tickets when deliberately "making good progress" on the bike.

Whilst increased speed reduces the time to process new info and react, most of the examples for going slower posted don't make sense. In each case peeps were going at a speed that allowed action to be taken when a fuckwit cuts a corner or decides to occupy the oncoming lane. Whether that speed is above or below the posted limit is a moot point.

It's really simple: Drive/Ride to the conditions and your abilities to always arrive in one piece with a smile on your face. If you cop a ticket come and whinge about it on KB.

AllanB

21st December 2014, 18:20

Such a limp hypothetical excuse, almost as bad as racing home because you might miss the start of Shortland Street :crazy:

But rain spots on black paint make such a mess, or so I am told :whistle:

AllanB

21st December 2014, 18:21

125 would increase the people doing runners to avoid loss of licence.

Good point and maybe considered when they set the 40. It would possibly be worth the run if set at 125 ....

AllanB

21st December 2014, 18:24

So ... you prefer a Percentage of the posted speed limit over the posted speed limit for loss of license ... rather than a defined number over EACH/ALL speed limit ... ???

Maybe .......

Like I said a set 40 above is madness in a built up 50 zone (seen plenty knobs in Skylines around CHCH doing 90 through 50 zones). I'd understand a 'passing buffer' on the open road.

Who knows just a though I had today, It's probably set in the same manner as half our laws - over too many drinks late at night.

bluninja

21st December 2014, 18:25

But rain spots on black paint make such a mess, or so I am told :whistle:

LOL I hate my bike getting wet cos all the dried dirt streaks and it looks like it needs a wash.

Metastable

21st December 2014, 18:26

It depends. I've seen roads in NZ where you'd have to be a great driver/rider to keep up to the posted 100kph speed limit. Conversely you get a multilane motorway that carries the same speed, yet would be very safe at 120kph. It's sad you guys now have a 40 over licence suspension, various provinces in Canada do too. Hopefully you have a court date first.

I have a track bike and a dirt bike, but no street bike.

For the most part I buy a car with the smallest, slowest engine I can find in the model I want. I have a Ute these days, so I can haul my bikes around and ... it is sort of quick off the line, but the top speed is only 160kph. It is a lot easier to drive the ute at a reasonable speed than a Golf GTI or AMG Benz or something along those lines...... I remember driving my GTI many moons ago and looking down at the speedometer and literally blurting out loud "H@!!Y $#!T I need to slow down". :D

EDIT:
(I have to give the American's credit with regards to how they often set speeds using an engineering study. Sometimes it shows a reduction is speed is appropriate, however the opposite often occurs and they increase the limits. IMO, that is how it should be done, as opposed to having some town councilors without proper training, being the individuals who pick arbitrary speed limits that don't make sense. Various states have 80 mph sections on the interstates and a stretch in Texas is actually 85mph = 137kph.)

Swoop

21st December 2014, 20:45

(I have to give the American's credit with regards to how they often set speeds using an engineering study. Sometimes it shows a reduction is speed is appropriate, however the opposite often occurs and they increase the limits. IMO, that is how it should be done, as opposed to having some town councilors without proper training, being the individuals who pick arbitrary speed limits that don't make sense.
That sort of logical approach is like kryptonite to our idiots.
We are dealing with morons who spout propaganda like "when the conditions change, reduce your speed". Road goes from wet to dry = slow down.:wacko:

Then we have the AA pushing for higher motorway speeds, BUT as a trade off for having point-to-point taxation cameras...:crazy::brick:

Scuba_Steve

21st December 2014, 20:54

Wife on the back of the bike slows me down, go too fast with her on the back & I hear about it :spanking::baby:

FJRider

21st December 2014, 21:07

It depends. I've seen roads in NZ where you'd have to be a great driver/rider to keep up to the posted 100kph speed limit. Conversely you get a multilane motorway that carries the same speed, yet would be very safe at 120kph.

Many vehicles (or drivers) on the NZ roads are not safe at 100 km/hr. Regardless of how good the roads are. Less so on multi-lane highways ...

It's sad you guys now have a 40 over licence suspension, various provinces in Canada do too. Hopefully you have a court date first.

40 over a posted speed limit (this includes temporary [roadworks] speed zones and passing stopped school buses [20 km/hr] ) and you get an automatic 28 days suspension of your license. Plus the (minimum) 3 months loss of license after your court case.

R650R

21st December 2014, 21:17

Maybe .......

Like I said a set 40 above is madness in a built up 50 zone (seen plenty knobs in Skylines around CHCH doing 90 through 50 zones). I'd understand a 'passing buffer' on the open road.

Who knows just a though I had today, It's probably set in the same manner as half our laws - over too many drinks late at night.

I like to go a bit fast sometimes too but accept the danger...

Can you please explain your logic behind accepting 90 in a 50 zone is madness but 140 in a 100 is somehow ok???
Just that it will be a bit difficult to ask you at your funeral...

AllanB

21st December 2014, 22:28

I like to go a bit fast sometimes too but accept the danger...

Can you please explain your logic behind accepting 90 in a 50 zone is madness but 140 in a 100 is somehow ok???
Just that it will be a bit difficult to ask you at your funeral...

Ah - it's good logic is mine. 50 zones are residential as a rule so highly likely cars will pull out of drives, kids run after balls etc etc. Slower is better.

Berries

21st December 2014, 22:30

We are dealing with morons who spout propaganda like "when the conditions change, reduce your speed". Road goes from wet to dry = slow down.:wacko:
But I do. Well I don't. Or do I? I understand how my tyres work in the wet, I understand increased braking distances, reduced visibility blah blah blah. So in the rain I am happy to do the standard 110 to 120 on my ride home*. I am slowing down from my desired dry road speed (handicapped by the 40km/h instant ban scenarios as it is) but in the end travel at the same speed as I do in the dry - speed limit plus my speedo tolerance plus my internal 'right time right place' tolerance. Others however have been so indoctrinated that there is so little thought and they do 80 on the open road just because it is raining. The speed differential caused by these arseholes is what causes the problem. Slow down in the wet is a fine message, and you should. But FFS, too many people just going from A to B in/on a mode of transport who don't give a shit.

* Hypothetically, obviously.

Gremlin

22nd December 2014, 00:04

My interpretation of speed limits were mere "guides" a few years ago (circa 07-08). Almost any ride would see a speed of 2xx, sometimes purely because I could, and it literally took seconds. Then I lost my licence due to 120 demerits in about 20 months.

Found out I really need my licence (I travel from client to client for work). Very stressful long days leading up to the loss, then 2 weeks of my boss moving me around the city before I gained a work licence (commented as one of the most lenient seen allowing travel 6 days a week across Auckland for 15 hours a day) for the last 10 weeks of suspension.

Got my licence back, sold the sportsbike, spent months working really hard to re-adjust my perceptions of speed back to law abiding and now I only speed (by a little) to complete an overtake. I've also found removing temptation to be a good idea. Anything more than around 100hp makes speed too easy. Fast forward to this year, still trying to maintain good discipline and keep demerits at 0.

Excitement in riding no longer comes from speed, now it's the riding itself and executing a nice smooth and safe ride. Plenty of enjoyment to be had within speed limits in the back roads. Anyone can twist the throttle on a straight stretch...

jasonu

22nd December 2014, 04:32

Hasn't the limit been reduced to 30 over?

Only for bible bashers:msn-wink:

WNJ

22nd December 2014, 05:16

I do not exceed 140.….

MY BIKE NEVER EVEN BEEN THAT FAST :shifty:

caspernz

22nd December 2014, 05:27

Voltaire

22nd December 2014, 05:36

Slow bikes work for me, the going fast feeling at legal speeds.
I had a 100 HP bike last year and sold it as got tired of looking in mirrors.

haydes55

22nd December 2014, 05:50

You're not the only one thinking like that.

Straight road 150km/h is a lot safer than trying to keep up to the speed limit on a twisty 100km/h road.

skippa1

22nd December 2014, 05:59

Straight line speed is easy, anyone can do it. Fastest riders i have ridden with a smooth and consistant, never at licence loss speed, but not slowing down in the windy stuff.

what slows me down? Risk vs reward, can be the risk of imminent danger, the risk of demerits or other risk that out weighs any benefit i get from what im doing.

Monsterbishi

22nd December 2014, 06:07

One of the reasons why the 40km/h limit is set, is to cater for scenarios where people may not have seen a speed limit sign, ie a 80 zone dropping to a 50 zone. If it was any less you'd see people losing their licences, or being forced to go through court processes for situations that simple don't warrant them like a ticket for speeding where the view of a speed sign was blocked by a passing truck, or vegetation.

R650R

22nd December 2014, 06:46

Ah - it's good logic is mine. 50 zones are residential as a rule so highly likely cars will pull out of drives, kids run after balls etc etc. Slower is better.

Of course there are no driveways in rural areas are there and they'll never be a milk tanker pulling out of the driveway when your coming past at 140 will there... Livestock wandering in long grass and goats are lot more prolific and unpredictable than kids chasing a ball...
There many rural roads that are no longer fun on the bike due to so many lifestyle blocks going in, too many driveways... Of course on your 140k thrash you'd prob not notice until too late...
Thanks for sharing your logic and you could prob debate it quite well but if you don't accept the high risk you wont be planning for it either...

R650R

22nd December 2014, 06:48

TheDemonLord

22nd December 2014, 07:41

What slows me down?

Punctures, small children, Cows in the middle of the road, lack of Petrol, Newtonian Physics

bluninja

22nd December 2014, 07:44

What slows me down?

Punctures, small children, Cows in the middle of the road, lack of Petrol, Newtonian Physics

You forgot drag :cool: and pedants :banana:

pritch

22nd December 2014, 08:27

You forgot drag :cool: and pedants :banana:

You ride in drag? :innocent:

Merry Christmas

unstuck

22nd December 2014, 08:37

bluninja

22nd December 2014, 08:43

You ride in drag? :innocent:

Merry Christmas

Sometimes I'm in drag in jeans :bleh: Bah Humbug !

breakaway

22nd December 2014, 09:10

The speed limit is designed to account for all skill levels and all machine types.

Hypothetically, passing a line of cars on double yellows on a modern 1000 quickly going from 120 to 220 isn't going to result in immediate death (provided visibility is not an issue).

Attempting the same in a Yaris with bicycle tyres and shit brakes and virtually no power to even be able to overtake on proper passing lanes would be another story altogheter.

Basically the road rules are in place to cater to the lowest common denominator.

Only way to improve the situation would be better rider/driver training and perhaps improving arterial roads (think autobahn) and very strict vehicle inspections, but that is very unlikely.

yevjenko

22nd December 2014, 09:54

Hypothetically:

...lots of stuff

Well said!

yevjenko

22nd December 2014, 09:56

Hasn't the limit been reduced to 30 over?

nope.

40km/h over a permanent speed limit, 50km/h over a temporary

Ninjacookie

22nd December 2014, 10:01

swbarnett

22nd December 2014, 10:08

have also been pulled over for 62 kph in a 50kph zone. Was by a school and I think that a ticket was absolutely warranted
This is just a pure case of double standards.

Case in point - The road past Harrisville school in Tuakau has a 70kph speed limit and no reduction at any time of the day..

I do not think that reduced speed tolerances are at all the answer. Increased driver education and training is. I recently got back from an overseas trip travelling around 4000kms. This was some open road driving, some highway/motorway and a mix of other stuff. The open road limit was 120kph but mostly the traffic flowed at 140-190kph.
I was travelling at 170kph in northern Italy overtaking cars doing about 150. Next thing I know there's a Merc on my tail flashing light and sounding horn. When I pulled in he was out of sight (straight road) in a couple of seconds.

Because drivers had a level of courtesy,
Exactly. A lack of courtesy is the route of all the problems we have on our roads (at least when it involves more than one vehicle). Solve that and the road toll will plummet. No matter the speeds involved.

TheDemonLord

22nd December 2014, 10:08

and yes, im going to ride that limit in the right hand lane. Because that way I don't have to watch so many directions at once for crazy people trying to cut me off.

Really?

You are going to sit in the overtaking lane, without overtaking?

I try to always keep left, unless overtaking (yah know, like it says in the road code)

swbarnett

22nd December 2014, 10:10

The other day I was headed out to Whitford and a dude who clearly thought he was gods gift to boganville (Auckland) was coming the other way mullet blowing out behind him. Panicked look in his eye as he came around the blind corner. Panicked because the boat he was towing had forced him wide. Completely into my lane at one point.

No problem thinks I. I just stitch out to the fog line and carry on past him thinking to myself and that is why I don't speed much if at all any more.
The fact that you survived had more to do with riding to the conditions than not speeding. I'd be willing to hazard a guess that the speed limit would've been too high for that blind corner.

swbarnett

22nd December 2014, 10:12

I found that having to ride as passenger with my woman driving for 28 days had an astounding effect on reducing my overall road speed.
For some it has the opposite affect.

swbarnett

22nd December 2014, 10:16

But rain spots on black paint make such a mess, or so I am told :whistle:
Nah, not a mess. It's the mark of the all-weather rider.

rastuscat

22nd December 2014, 10:26

Excitement in riding no longer comes from speed, now it's the riding itself and executing a nice smooth and safe ride. Plenty of enjoyment to be had within speed limits in the back roads. Anyone can twist the throttle on a straight stretch...

Smooth is the new fast.

Anyone can point a bike down a long straight road and go fast.

But it takes skill to wind good speed out of a bike in the twisties.

I'm wit chew, Grem

haydes55

22nd December 2014, 10:27

So topics like this make me wonder...

Am I the only one who actually enjoys sticking to the speed limit (or even slightly under) for a nice scenic ride?

I had 2 bikes and 4 cars all getting whingey with me the other day for riding at 100 down the motorway. Yes, I'm going to stick to the speed limit and yes, im going to ride that limit in the right hand lane. Because that way I don't have to watch so many directions at once for crazy people trying to cut me off.

Stick to the right lane if you go slow, I love people like you, it leaves the left hand lane completely empty and so much faster than the right lane.

Also do you even road rules?

Just because you don't speed, doesn't mean you can ignore other road rules and stay safe. That's the same mentality the elderly people have when they crash and die at 70km/h in a back country road. I don't break a single traffic rule when I ride/drive, except speed limits. I've indicated wrong probably 3 times this year.

yevjenko

22nd December 2014, 10:31

40 over a posted speed limit (this includes temporary [roadworks] speed zones and passing stopped school buses [20 km/hr] ) and you get an automatic 28 days suspension of your license. Plus the (minimum) 3 months loss of license after your court case.

Nope.

Having hypothetically just had this experience, the rules are 40km/h over a permanent speed limit or 50km/h over a temporary speed limit results in an instant suspension for 28 days and a walk home.

Then, you will have an appearance in traffic court (probably in front of a JP rather than a judge) charged with exceeding the permanent speed limit by more than 40km/h, resulting in a fine and 50 demerit points. Depending on how the charge has been laid, you could be up for a grand, or 10 grand.

Depending on where you are in the country you will probably find that you will also be charged with dangerous driving - this is up to the police prosecutor and policies of the local police force. It is the dangerous driving charge, not the excess speed charge, that that carries the disqualification which is a minimum of 6 months.

You may find that you have been charged with careless instead of dangerous, which carries a minimum of 3 months.

If you haven't been charged with careless or dangerous, the JP can if he wishes add a charge of careless to the charge sheet (but not dangerous), although most JP's don't know that they can do this. The police prosecutor can also ask for the case to be withdrawn so that he can lay further charges of careless or dangerous if he doesn't agree with the cop who laid the charges.

two points of interest...

1) the demerit's don't get added onto your licence until you pay the fine, so if you have some points expiring soon, you can delay your payment so that you don't get banned on the 100 point accumulator. allegedly :)

2) the auto number plate recognition system that is being rolled out on the cars at the moment is not a live feed. I allegedly got pulled over because the system in the car flagged that the bike was owned by a suspended driver even though i had allegedly had my licence back for 2 weeks at that point.

EDIT: Passing the Attitude Test at the roadside may have the effect of a serious reduction in charges. However your mileage may vary :)

I found that having to ride as passenger with my woman driving for 28 days had an astounding effect on reducing my overall road speed.

This.... and the fact that i may or may not have many points left on my licence now

yevjenko

22nd December 2014, 10:36

It depends. I've seen roads in NZ where you'd have to be a great driver/rider to keep up to the posted 100kph speed limit. Conversely you get a multilane motorway that carries the same speed, yet would be very safe at 120kph. It's sad you guys now have a 40 over licence suspension, various provinces in Canada do too. Hopefully you have a court date first.

<snip>

EDIT:
(I have to give the American's credit with regards to how they often set speeds using an engineering study. Sometimes it shows a reduction is speed is appropriate, however the opposite often occurs and they increase the limits. IMO, that is how it should be done, as opposed to having some town councilors without proper training, being the individuals who pick arbitrary speed limits that don't make sense. Various states have 80 mph sections on the interstates and a stretch in Texas is actually 85mph = 137kph.)

There are some research from Canada that raising the speed limit where appropriate actually reduces the road toll. But there is no way in hell that the ptb here would be that intelligent.

to my mind, if it's safe enough to do 100km/h on a one carriageway road with traffic travelling in both directions, then it must be safer to do more than 100 on a multi lane highway with dividing barriers... needless to say i didn't mention my theory to the copper that pulled me up recently.

eelracing

22nd December 2014, 10:36

Your reg/rectifier burning out halfway to the middle of fucking nowhere.

jasonu

22nd December 2014, 10:45

Scuba_Steve

22nd December 2014, 10:49

The speed limit is designed to account for all skill levels and all machine types.

...

Basically the road rules are in place to cater to the lowest common denominator.

Nope, it's a made up number nothing more & the road rules/layout creates the lowest common denominator
If people are told not to think, they're not going to think

I had 2 bikes and 4 cars all getting whingey with me the other day for riding at 100 down the motorway. Yes, I'm going to stick to the speed limit and yes, im going to ride that limit in the right hand lane. Because that way I don't have to watch so many directions at once for crazy people trying to cut me off.

uncourteous knob... have some fucking manners on the road. It's not only written in legislation what you're doing is illegal (doubly so in-fact) but it's uncourteous & just a wank move, like people who cut lines.

Flip

22nd December 2014, 11:03

Excitement in riding no longer comes from speed, now it's the riding itself and executing a nice smooth and safe ride. Plenty of enjoyment to be had within speed limits in the back roads. Anyone can twist the throttle on a straight stretch...

I am with Grem 100%. Too many rozza collecting road tax these days.

Any fool can open the throttle and go fast on a straight road. I enjoy riding a relatively underpowered bike with poor road manners relatively quickly. Its a bit more of a challange than riding a powerfull bike with great handling relatively slowly.

If I want to get some where quickly I will take the car.

Blackbird

22nd December 2014, 11:10

Uncourteous knob... have some fucking manners on the road. It's not only written in legislation what you're doing is illegal (doubly so in-fact) but it's uncourteous & just a wank move, like people who cut lines.

Discourteous and dumb most definitely, but written in legislation... I don't think so. From what I understand from the training sergeant in south Auckland, each lane is treated as a separate road and there is no such thing as an "overtaking lane" or similar connotations. That means that you can "undertake" to pass a slower vehicle in your lane provided that normal safe practice is adhered to. Can any of the police on this forum confirm that?

yevjenko

22nd December 2014, 11:19

So topics like this make me wonder...

Am I the only one who actually enjoys sticking to the speed limit (or even slightly under) for a nice scenic ride?

I had 2 bikes and 4 cars all getting whingey with me the other day for riding at 100 down the motorway. Yes, I'm going to stick to the speed limit and yes, im going to ride that limit in the right hand lane. Because that way I don't have to watch so many directions at once for crazy people trying to cut me off.

Really? Really?????

I have nothing against you if you want to ride to the speed limit. whatever floats your boat. but sitting in the outside lane at 100 is just plain stupid.

Keep left. Ever heard of that?
What about this one - Don't hold up traffic wanting to pass you.

You SHOULD be watching in all directions. it's called PAYING ATTENTION.

so you'll comply with an arbitrarily chosen speed limit not based upon any ratio of safety to vehicles travelling on that road, but you won't comply with other rules designed to reduce frustration of other drivers, which then cause them to make rash decisions and potentially drive dangerously to get past you???

take a look at your riding and how it affects those around you before you get caught up in an incident that you have helped create

yevjenko

22nd December 2014, 11:24

Madness

22nd December 2014, 11:25

Having hypothetically just had this experience, the rules are 40km/h over a permanent speed limit or 50km/h over a temporary speed limit results in an instant suspension for 28 days and a walk home.

Then, you will have an appearance in traffic court (probably in front of a JP rather than a judge) charged with exceeding the permanent speed limit by more than 40km/h, resulting in a fine and 50 demerit points. Depending on how the charge has been laid, you could be up for a grand, or 10 grand.

Pretty sure the court appearance thing kicks in at 50 over. I was dealt with roadside at 40 over, no summons issued.

1) the demerit's don't get added onto your licence until you pay the fine, so if you have some points expiring soon, you can delay your payment so that you don't get banned on the 100 point accumulator. allegedly :)

Nope. The points activate at point of payment or non-payment at Infringement Bureau. The date that is applied to these points is the date of the offence. The situation you described is how it was when Demerits were introduced and this loop-hole has since been closed, really fucking tight.

buggerit

22nd December 2014, 11:26

So topics like this make me wonder...

Am I the only one who actually enjoys sticking to the speed limit (or even slightly under) for a nice scenic ride?

I had 2 bikes and 4 cars all getting whingey with me the other day for riding at 100 down the motorway. Yes, I'm going to stick to the speed limit and yes, im going to ride that limit in the right hand lane. Because that way I don't have to watch so many directions at once for crazy people trying to cut me off.

I you are going off your speedo reading you are probably only doing 94kph.
There is nothing scenic about a motorway, keep your eyes on the road and use your mirrors.
If you dont enjoy getting taken from behind, I suggest you let faster traffic through or travel faster to stay with the flow.
Holding up traffic on a motorcycle is never a good idea, unless you like hospital food.
I actually like to travel 5kmh faster than the flow as it drastically reduces the number of vehicles passing you and gives you
a better idea of whats going on in all the lanes and keeps you focused,not sight seeeing.

skippa1

22nd December 2014, 11:31

yevjenko

22nd December 2014, 11:38

Discourteous and dumb most definitely, but written in legislation... I don't think so. From what I understand from the training sergeant in south Auckland, each lane is treated as a separate road and there is no such thing as an "overtaking lane" or similar connotations. That means that you can "undertake" to pass a slower vehicle in your lane provided that normal safe practice is adhered to. Can any of the police on this forum confirm that?

you should probably read that rode code again.

you must use the left most lane available to you - here's a direct link to the road code. http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/roadcode/about-driving/keeping-left.html

i can't believe this is not being taught properly

and seeing as you don't seem to get the undertaking / passing on the left rule i thought i'd give you that one too http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/roadcode/about-driving/passing.html

EDIT: note that you can have demerit points awarded against you for failing to keep left -"Failing to keep as close as practicable to left edge of roadway – 20 Points"

yevjenko

22nd December 2014, 11:43

Pretty sure the court appearance thing kicks in at 50 over. I was dealt with roadside at 40 over, no summons issued.

Yes you are right - it is over 150 for the summons. the road tax collector had made a typo on my form... allegedly

Nope. The points activate at point of payment or non-payment at Infringement Bureau. The date that is applied to these points is the date of the offence. The situation you described is how it was when Demerits were introduced and this loop-hole has since been closed, really fucking tight.

Good to know!

pritch

22nd December 2014, 11:44

Am I the only one who actually enjoys sticking to the speed limit (or even slightly under) for a nice scenic ride?

No, you and Cassina.

Scuba_Steve

22nd December 2014, 12:09

Discourteous and dumb most definitely, but written in legislation... I don't think so. From what I understand from the training sergeant in south Auckland, each lane is treated as a separate road and there is no such thing as an "overtaking lane" or similar connotations. That means that you can "undertake" to pass a slower vehicle in your lane provided that normal safe practice is adhered to. Can any of the police on this forum confirm that?

I do, see below & also see Road User Rule 2004 section 2.1 "Keeping Left"; also that training sergeant should be disciplined if that's what he's/she's teaching

you should probably read that rode code again.

you must use the left most lane available to you - here's a direct link to the road code. http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/roadcode/about-driving/keeping-left.html

i can't believe this is not being taught properly

In NZ you can "undertake" in a separate lane (something I believe most countries ban outright) but you also must keep left unless overtaking or turning right which should really make the former redundant except as we see on here alot don't know the rules

imdying

22nd December 2014, 12:33

I do, see below & also see Road User Rule 2004 section 2.1 "Keeping Left"; also that training sergeant should be disciplined if that's what he's/she's teachingHe said legislation, i.e. actual law, not just a user friendly interpretation of some laws and a bit of common sense mixed in. Can you find that on www.legislation.govt.nz?

yevjenko

22nd December 2014, 12:59

He said legislation, i.e. actual law, not just a user friendly interpretation of some laws and a bit of common sense mixed in. Can you find that on www.legislation.govt.nz?

Yep.

Keeping left
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2004/0427/latest/DLM303041.html

and here's the passing on the left bit
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2004/0427/latest/DLM303050.html

caspernz

22nd December 2014, 13:03

I you are going off your speedo reading you are probably only doing 94kph.
There is nothing scenic about a motorway, keep your eyes on the road and use your mirrors.
If you dont enjoy getting taken from behind, I suggest you let faster traffic through or travel faster to stay with the flow.
Holding up traffic on a motorcycle is never a good idea, unless you like hospital food.
I actually like to travel 5kmh faster than the flow as it drastically reduces the number of vehicles passing you and gives you
a better idea of whats going on in all the lanes and keeps you focused,not sight seeeing.

Ah yep, that sounds like the voice of an experienced rider :2thumbsup

nerrrd

22nd December 2014, 13:05

So topics like this make me wonder...

Am I the only one who actually enjoys sticking to the speed limit (or even slightly under) for a nice scenic ride?

No you're not, welcome to my world. But this...

I had 2 bikes and 4 cars all getting whingey with me the other day for riding at 100 down the motorway. Yes, I'm going to stick to the speed limit and yes, im going to ride that limit in the right hand lane. Because that way I don't have to watch so many directions at once for crazy people trying to cut me off.

...please don't do this. Best to go with the flow, that way you can keep some buffer space around you. And if you can't or don't want to keep up, let the faster traffic past where you can do so safely. Especially if they're Audi drivers - double especially if the Audi is a black sedan, or alternatively an any-coloured Audi SUV. But I digress.

You might even get a wave, 'cos you've earned a bit of respect. Waves are cool.

rastuscat

22nd December 2014, 13:07

Fuck me dead:no::no::no::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

That's a kind offer, but no.

Scuba_Steve

22nd December 2014, 13:09

He said legislation, i.e. actual law, not just a user friendly interpretation of some laws and a bit of common sense mixed in. Can you find that on www.legislation.govt.nz?

Yep I not only gave you the piece of legislation "Road User Rule 2004" but the section it comes under "2.1" titled "Keeping left"

Do you need me to search it out for you too?
Edit: Actually I see yevjenko's already done that for you

imdying

22nd December 2014, 13:19

Yep.

Keeping left
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2004/0427/latest/DLM303041.html

and here's the passing on the left bit
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2004/0427/latest/DLM303050.html

Brilliant, ta for that :)

yevjenko

22nd December 2014, 14:54

Yep I not only gave you the piece of legislation "Road User Rule 2004" but the section it comes under "2.1" titled "Keeping left"

Do you need me to search it out for you too?
Edit: Actually I see yevjenko's already done that for you
Literally a 30 second search.... ;)

skippa1

22nd December 2014, 14:56

That's a kind offer, but no.Is that the official line?

R650R

22nd December 2014, 16:05

Nope.

Having hypothetically just had this experience, the rules are 40km/h over a permanent speed limit or 50km/h over a temporary speed limit results in an instant suspension for 28 days and a walk home.

Then, you will have an appearance in traffic court (probably in front of a JP rather than a judge) charged with exceeding the permanent speed limit by more than 40km/h, resulting in a fine and 50 demerit points. Depending on how the charge has been laid, you could be up for a grand, or 10 grand.

Depending on where you are in the country you will probably find that you will also be charged with dangerous driving - this is up to the police prosecutor and policies of the local police force. It is the dangerous driving charge, not the excess speed charge, that that carries the disqualification which is a minimum of 6 months.

You may find that you have been charged with careless instead of dangerous, which carries a minimum of 3 months.

Meanwhile back in the real world none of this shit happens. There's been plenty of high speed offence cases in our local news, none of them have gone to jail and only token extra fines on top of their other offences, the usual wet bus ticket arrangement.

R650R

22nd December 2014, 16:06

AllanB

22nd December 2014, 17:18

Of course there are no driveways in rural areas are there and they'll never be a milk tanker pulling out of the driveway when your coming past at 140 will there... Livestock wandering in long grass and goats are lot more prolific and unpredictable than kids chasing a ball...
There many rural roads that are no longer fun on the bike due to so many lifestyle blocks going in, too many driveways... Of course on your 140k thrash you'd prob not notice until too late...
Thanks for sharing your logic and you could prob debate it quite well but if you don't accept the high risk you wont be planning for it either...

Chill, you are taking a question way to personally.

Lower risk in a carefully selected environment on the perfect day :-) Anytime you get into or onto any vehicle (or even a scooter) you are accepting a certain amount of risk. Ensuring you are not acting like a total knob is an entirely different matter. Thus the 140 limit I guess.

Shit some months back I was having a piss and zipped my trousers up too quickly causing a painful bleeder of the shaft.

I reported this to the police but they told me to try ACC as the incident was not under their jurisdiction. I disagreed as the zip maker had obviously not provided a suitable warning label and as such could have been charged with potential manslaughter (ones shaft bleeds quite a lot....)

Jesus, Burt Munroe would turn in his grave at the state of NZ motorcycling. Imagine fatting your motorcycle along a beach ….. Sinful.

AllanB

22nd December 2014, 17:27

slofox

22nd December 2014, 17:44

Would a lower loss of licence limit of say 125 on the open road slow you down?.

No........:crazy:

BlackSheepLogic

22nd December 2014, 18:19

I always though a once a year closed road affair would be awesome. Motorcycle only, suitable categories and levels of comfort/skill. Sign a waiver. Helicopters on hand (look there will be crashes as you cannot legislate against the foolish)

I would also like see cars banned from using roundabouts.

AllanB

22nd December 2014, 18:32

I would also like see cars banned from using roundabouts.

I am not a fan of roundabouts - those double lane ones appear to confuse too many drivers into crossing 'lanes' half way around without out a care in the world.

Scuba_Steve

22nd December 2014, 19:07

I am not a fan of roundabouts - those double lane ones appear to confuse too many drivers into crossing 'lanes' half way around without out a care in the world.

You should come use a couple of the Lower Hutt roundabouts, they put intersections on them... Da fuck is the point of the roundabout if you're just gonna go & put fucking giveways on them!!! :mad:

FJRider

22nd December 2014, 19:10

Nope.

I was almost right ...

Driver licence suspension

From 16 January 2006, immediate 28-day licence suspension applies if you're caught travelling more than 40 km/h over the permanent posted speed limit, or more than 50 km/h over a posted temporary, holiday or variable speed limit.

R650R

22nd December 2014, 20:17

Chill, you are taking a question way to personally.

Its not personal, I speed from time to time. But you cant go into risk compensation mode and justify to your self that major overspeed in one environment is safer than another as a general thought.
Its your call, just make sure your mother has money for flowers next time you go out for that 'safer' ride....

BigAl

22nd December 2014, 20:25

Its not personal, I speed from time to time. But you cant go into risk compensation mode and justify to your self that major overspeed in one environment is safer than another as a general thought.
Its your call, just make sure your mother has money for flowers next time you go out for that 'safer' ride....

Geez man, if I was you I'd take the bus.

No risk there, or perhaps you could find some.

Brett

22nd December 2014, 20:27

Just to throw a spanner in the works .......

All those lovely twisty tight hill road around my area are now full of bloody cyclists and bloody cars. It's a dangerous risk to be fatting around them at a degree of speed nowadays.

I always though a once a year closed road affair would be awesome. Motorcycle only, suitable categories and levels of comfort/skill. Sign a waiver. Helicopters on hand (look there will be crashes as you cannot legislate against the foolish).

More dreaming on my behalf.

Back in the more mental days, it was called "any given Saturday doing the Coro Loop". :shifty: Man, had a lot of really insane, fast, exhilarating and fun rides. These were more akin to amateur road racing than "spirited riding". The level of "crazy" just went North of mental the more times it happened. Seen motorcycles thrown UP into trees, down banks and cliffs, across the road, into ditches and heaven knows what else. They were fun when you are young, dumb and full of bravado with very little responsibility. These days, I wouldn't want to trade places with that young person for anything. Not all of those boys I rode with are alive today directly as a result of their road riding attitudes. Others have bad injuries to live with. I am glad to have had the experience, and glad to have moved on. I now know what it is to have responsibilities and for people to rely on you. As a father, I take my role of fatherhood very seriously and want to be around to see my children grow up, God willing. I am an employer, providing income to around 30 families - at least half of which would struggle to find employment elsewhere, despite being good workers. I still enjoy a spirited ride or drive, and LOVE a fast track day, but if anything has slowed me down the most, it is the realisation of responsibility in life.

Still love the feel of a Superbike shaking it's head a little under heavy acceleration, tyre just skipping off the road...or going airborn altogether and the feel of a knee slider skimming the tarmac while the bike cuts a smooth line across the apex though! You can't change a speed freak, only tame him a little.

R650R

22nd December 2014, 20:29

Geez man, if I was you I'd take the bus.

No risk there, or perhaps you could find some.

Oh I'm plenty stupid on the roads from time to time also....
My issue is originally he was banging on about people doing 90 in 50 zone and then trying to say 140k in 100 zone was somehow less risky than the former....
If your going to speed you have to accept its risky....

Brett

22nd December 2014, 20:48

Oh I'm plenty stupid on the roads from time to time also....
My issue is originally he was banging on about people doing 90 in 50 zone and then trying to say 140k in 100 zone was somehow less risky than the former....
If your going to speed you have to accept its risky....

I would actually contend that 90 in a 50 IS more dangerous than 140 in a 100. Reasons are pretty simple. a 50kph is a built up area with more activity going on usually. Think of your average suburban road, lots of side roads for people to pull out from, pedestrian crossings for people to walk across etc. Also, people in a 50kph area are generally operating at a lower level of awareness than those who are around the open road where the speeds dictate a higher level of care and attention. Speeding IS risky. As your velocity increases from 0, the risk to self and others increases proportionally / according to the laws of physics. There is not really any sort of things as a "safe speed". Ever tried walking into a door frame? It fuckin hurts! You have potential to get pretty messed up at 50kph, 90kph, 100kph or 140kph.

BMWST?

22nd December 2014, 21:18

AllanB

22nd December 2014, 22:00

well its obvious innit...it needs to be 40 k over otherwise we would all get wet before we got home!?!?

Exactly! ......

jasonu

23rd December 2014, 02:35

You should come use a couple of the Lower Hutt roundabouts, they put intersections on them... Da fuck is the point of the roundabout if you're just gonna go & put fucking giveways on them!!! :mad:

Eh??? Any chance of a diagram or picture of this stupidity?

caspernz

23rd December 2014, 06:49

Eh??? Any chance of a diagram or picture of this stupidity?

The roundabout at the motorway end of Petone Esplanade is the only one I know of, has a give way sign on the roundabout, so traffic on the roundabout has to give way to traffic approaching the roundabout. Basically to keep the traffic coming off the motorway exit ramp flowing.

Confusing for folks new to the area, mostly on account of it being unique/unusual. I suppose it's like a flyover from the $2 shop:confused::blink:

BlackSheepLogic

23rd December 2014, 07:58

Scuba_Steve

23rd December 2014, 08:24

Eh??? Any chance of a diagram or picture of this stupidity?

I prob make it sound worse than it is but it's just fucking bad road design & as caspernz says it just confuses people which in turn can make them dangerous

Anyways heres pics of some, bit blurry they came from Googley Maps
http://newzealandmafia.com/files/LHMW.png
http://newzealandmafia.com/files/LHC.png
http://newzealandmafia.com/files/LHBH.png

And they also like to put "guide lines" on them which I've seen more then a few people confuse for "right of way" like those lines on corners that tell you the road curves rather than goes straight ahead
http://newzealandmafia.com/files/UHCC.png

caspernz

23rd December 2014, 08:25

I'm a little slow this morning, how does the give way sign help? During peek traffic times wouldn't that cause a log jam on the roundabout grid locking it? Perhaps a pic would help.

Try this. http://goo.gl/maps/fFBOm

Traffic entering roundabout at the 6 o'clock mark encounter a give way on the roundabout to let traffic from the 9 o'clock mark go first.

BMWST?

23rd December 2014, 08:28

its to let the traffic from sh2 flow better

oneofsix

23rd December 2014, 08:34

The roundabout at the motorway end of Petone Esplanade is the only one I know of, has a give way sign on the roundabout, so traffic on the roundabout has to give way to traffic approaching the roundabout. Basically to keep the traffic coming off the motorway exit ramp flowing.

Confusing for folks new to the area, mostly on account of it being unique/unusual. I suppose it's like a flyover from the $2 shop:confused::blink:

Have they done away with the give way on the round about off the Ewan Bridge Lower Hutt? Seems to be a doumb idea someone in lower hutt came up with

its to let the traffic from sh2 flow better
There are better ways to do it rather than change the basic concept of world wide traffic flow device. Feilding and other places do it with slip roads and merges. Give ways in round abouts are dangerous. People are confused enough about round abouts, to then change how they work according to the road code just makes things worse and is totally and inexcusably dumb.

caspernz

23rd December 2014, 08:47

Have they done away with the give way on the round about off the Ewan Bridge Lower Hutt? Seems to be a doumb idea someone in lower hutt came up with.

If it's that abomination on the western side of the Ewen Bridge you're referring to, I spent 10 years in Welly and never thought of that as a roundabout... Still as is, and very confusing for first timers too.

http://goo.gl/maps/AzLjF

We're getting off topic here I suppose...but traffic engineering like this certainly slows a few folks down :eek:

BMWST?

23rd December 2014, 09:47

Have they done away with the give way on the round about off the Ewan Bridge Lower Hutt? Seems to be a doumb idea someone in lower hutt came up with

There are better ways to do it rather than change the basic concept of world wide traffic flow device. Feilding and other places do it with slip roads and merges. Give ways in round abouts are dangerous. People are confused enough about round abouts, to then change how they work according to the road code just makes things worse and is totally and inexcusably dumb.
Hey,i didnt design it!

carbonhed

23rd December 2014, 13:44

its to let the traffic from sh2 flow better

I sailed through that in the car the first time I came across it. Folks who had the right of way were very accommodating :laugh: Must happen all the time.

jasonu

23rd December 2014, 14:37

I prob make it sound worse than it is but it's just fucking bad road design & as caspernz says it just confuses people which in turn can make them dangerous

Anyways heres pics of some, bit blurry they came from Googley Maps
http://newzealandmafia.com/files/LHMW.png
http://newzealandmafia.com/files/LHC.png
http://newzealandmafia.com/files/LHBH.png

And they also like to put "guide lines" on them which I've seen more then a few people confuse for "right of way" like those lines on corners that tell you the road curves rather than goes straight ahead
http://newzealandmafia.com/files/UHCC.png

Cheers for the pix.
So is it Vogel st. that has the giveway where the painted strips are? It really isn't a roundabout as such. More like a curved street with multiple entrances and exits, some of which are controlled. Was the 'roundabout' added to an existing T intersection that no one could ever exit due to the old right hand rule?

jasonu

23rd December 2014, 14:42

Try this. http://goo.gl/maps/fFBOm

Traffic entering roundabout at the 6 o'clock mark encounter a give way on the roundabout to let traffic from the 9 o'clock mark go first.

If it's that abomination on the western side of the Ewen Bridge you're referring to, I spent 10 years in Welly and never thought of that as a roundabout... Still as is, and very confusing for first timers too.

http://goo.gl/maps/AzLjF

We're getting off topic here I suppose...but traffic engineering like this certainly slows a few folks down :eek:

...and they wonder why there are so many accidents involving foreigners...

Ripperjon

23rd December 2014, 14:48

Reminds me of this old favourite i used to tackle on the way to work and back, back home (Wales).

http://www.capitasymonds.co.uk/images/m4coldra_web.jpg
It has multiple sets of traffic lights all round it which serve to turn the inside lane into a dragstrip lest you end up stuck there going round in circles.

SPman

23rd December 2014, 16:10

Would a lower loss of licence limit of say 125 on the open road slow you down?.

Basically....I don't give a fuck any more (if I ever did in the past)

My speed is what it is, consistent with conditions, situational awareness, traffic, tiredness, spidery sense, etc etc. On the open road it can be 150+ or 80......if I'm pinged...well.....tough. It's usually only around 120 except when passing, anyway. Naked bikes tend to slow you down... Highway patrol over here are grumpier and more pedantic than back home (if that's possible).

AllanB

23rd December 2014, 16:33

The naked bikes do tend to self regulate cruising speeds I agree.

Man, those roundabouts give me the shits just looking at them.

Metastable

23rd December 2014, 18:30

There are some research from Canada that raising the speed limit where appropriate actually reduces the road toll. But there is no way in hell that the ptb here would be that intelligent.

to my mind, if it's safe enough to do 100km/h on a one carriageway road with traffic travelling in both directions, then it must be safer to do more than 100 on a multi lane highway with dividing barriers... needless to say i didn't mention my theory to the copper that pulled me up recently.

Yes - In British Columbia they recently raised the speed limits. Having said that they also have a 40kph over and automatic licence suspension law, without a court date. That bit I don't agree. I don't mind they having a licence suspension, but the whole without a court date thing is IMO, wrong.

Also, IMO you can't cater to the lowest common denominator. You need to look at the average speed traveled and pick an 80th percentile. That is the safest speed limit. Picking the safest speed doesn't mean picking a speed that is safer for the driver that is scared or can't handle a certain speed, because they will typically go slower regardless. Key thing is to teach lane discipline and driver awareness.

R650R

23rd December 2014, 19:55

Reminds me of this old favourite i used to tackle on the way to work and back, back home (Wales).

It has multiple sets of traffic lights all round it which serve to turn the inside lane into a dragstrip lest you end up stuck there going round in circles.

You've prob just caused a whole heap of kiwis to have their jaws drop to the floor.... hell people here cried enough about traffic lights on onramps....
They are a good idea those big roundabouts with lights as they are so big you get cars coming round at silly speeds....
We have a roundabout in h'nth same as what was described earlier... works fine.

yevjenko

23rd December 2014, 23:00

rastuscat

24th December 2014, 05:34

bluninja

24th December 2014, 06:18

Engineer an environment which causes slower speeds, and you decrease the impact of crashes.

This is like standing at the bottom of the cliff and saying we should make the cliff lower to reduce the impact of landing.

AllanB

24th December 2014, 06:29

I reckon THAT would slow me down. Engineer an environment which causes slower speeds, and you decrease the impact of crashes.

Ironically Mother Nature did that in Christchurch - darn bumpy roads slow us down.

R650R

24th December 2014, 06:39

Google the Swindon Roundabout.

Interesting article on Wikipedia.

Insurance companies have voted it the worst in the UK, as it causes the most minor crashes, costing pots of dosh.

The Wiki article also points put that it's so bloody confusing that people drive amazingly curiously, and the throughput of traffic is awesome.

I reckon THAT would slow me down. Engineer an environment which causes slower speeds, and you decrease the impact of crashes.

AKA Magic roundabout.... I went through that twice in a 44T hardsider artic while driving over there. Everyone had talked it up before I got there....
But it works and is no problem for a normal driver with logical thought processes... I can see how unconfident drivers would have an issues but that's for them to grow and develop to deal with it.
There's another 'weird' one in the suburbs outside of the M25 on that other ring road, shaped like long sausage it turns two high speed T junctions into one big roundabout type affair, kinda like how some race tracks have out chicanes in has speeds have outgrown runoff areas.

Screw the insurance companies, their data is probably skewed as really they are treating multiple intersections as one for claims data purposes.
Roundabouts are well known to cause more crashes everywhere compared to traffic lights or other options but they are generally lower speed accidents.

A414 North Orbital road between Colney Heath lane and Smallford lane

https://www.google.co.nz/maps/@51.7426423,-0.2676709,345m/data=!3m1!1e3

I reckon this is what we need for the HB expressway/Pakowhai rd/Links road disaster correction unless transit funds flyovers....

Scuba_Steve

24th December 2014, 06:51

I reckon THAT would slow me down. Engineer an environment which causes slower speeds, and you decrease the impact of crashes.

But increase crashes... That pretty much sums up your speed scam thinking too; make people crash but have them do it at a slower speed. Ambulance at bottom of hill thinking & dangerous
Most of us however prefer to avoid the crash in the 1st place especially given we ride bikes with very little protection even from a slow speed crash. No crash = no death & no injury.

Scuba_Steve

24th December 2014, 06:53

AKA Magic roundabout.... I went through that twice in a 44T hardsider artic while driving over there. Everyone had talked it up before I got there....
But it works and is no problem for a normal driver with logical thought processes... I can see how unconfident drivers would have an issues but that's for them to grow and develop to deal with it.

Logical thought process says it should not exist in the 1st place, it's just more bad road design.

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/63126000/jpg/_63126500_msn_magic_roundabout_470x350.jpg

rastuscat

24th December 2014, 09:49

But increase crashes... That pretty much sums up your speed scam thinking too; make people crash but have them do it at a slower speed. Ambulance at bottom of hill thinking & dangerous
Most of us however prefer to avoid the crash in the 1st place especially given we ride bikes with very little protection even from a slow speed crash. No crash = no death & no injury.

It's the speed scam accusation that causes me to revile the most.

The folk who allegedly perpetrate it have no idea they are doing so.

Maybe that's coz it's not a scam. Maybe it is, just well hidden, and visionaries such as yourself are the few who can see it.

Voltaire

24th December 2014, 10:08

My wife took this pic of Vietnam bikes fitted with airbags:rolleyes:
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p235/rednzep/IMG_1732_zps1e1ef927.jpg

Edbear

24th December 2014, 10:19

Yes - In British Columbia they recently raised the speed limits. Having said that they also have a 40kph over and automatic licence suspension law, without a court date. That bit I don't agree. I don't mind they having a licence suspension, but the whole without a court date thing is IMO, wrong.

Also, IMO you can't cater to the lowest common denominator. You need to look at the average speed traveled and pick an 80th percentile. That is the safest speed limit. Picking the safest speed doesn't mean picking a speed that is safer for the driver that is scared or can't handle a certain speed, because they will typically go slower regardless. Key thing is to teach lane discipline and driver awareness.

Very true! Lost on so many drivers, though, sadly.

It's the speed scam accusation that causes me to revile the most.

The folk who allegedly perpetrate it have no idea they are doing so.

Maybe that's coz it's not a scam. Maybe it is, just well hidden, and visionaries such as yourself are the few who can see it.

I think people lose sight of the fact of human nature. It wouldn't matter what the speed limit was, many would want to exceed it, even if only by a few km/hr. I typically set my cruise control at around 101-102, why? Before the clampdown, I would set it at 104 to take advantage of the tolerance.

Set the open road speed limit at 90, 100, or 110 and you will still have the same arguments. The authorities have the right and the power to set a speed limit for a road and do so after a lot of consultation. You will never please everyone and many are struggling to achieve or maintain whatever speed limit is in place on any road. The majority of drivers, it would seem, anyway, are not happy with the 100k limit and will never drive at that speed. Tricky thing is to get them to realise they are not the best drivers and should therefore travel in the left hand lane! Maintaining a consistent speed, too, is impossible for many. Not to mention that so many are driving on auto-pilot with their minds everywhere else!

Some are very capable and very experienced and can drive/ride at a level well above the speed limit. The fact that they don't always know who they are, though, is testified by so many deaths where the driver/rider is solely to blame. Who judges one's capability?

In the end, it is a fact of living in a society that we take the majority and/or authority view, and if you don't like it, you have two options. Break the rules and freely accept the consequences, or go and live somewhere else.

Bikemad

24th December 2014, 10:32

couple of valium and a moggy and it's lights out for me.......no wait!!

Scuba_Steve

24th December 2014, 10:39

It's the speed scam accusation that causes me to revile the most.

The folk who allegedly perpetrate it have no idea they are doing so.

Maybe that's coz it's not a scam. Maybe it is, just well hidden, and visionaries such as yourself are the few who can see it.

It's a scam in the fact that it is claimed for "safety" yet has never once been shown to do as claimed, in-fact there are studies showing it does the exact opposite.
As I have mentioned even John Lambert a man who has worked in road safety for over half a century & continues to do so now has gone on record saying "there is no reputable study anywhere in the world that shows it works, not one" (& no offence but I'mma take the word of a dude in road safety for over half a century over that of a dude that pushes a gang policy especially since the evidence backs his claims) yet here it is continued to be pushed for "safety" with no evidence to back the claim up while the running of it is illegal & in complete disregard for NZ legislation & peoples rights.

It's like the whole paid parking "to keep vehicles moving & free up parks" we all know that's BS too & I have some respect for the WCC as they'll actually admit it, they come straight out & say it's to make the council $$$ (course I still don't respect the fact they do it in the 1st place but at-least they're not lying about why they do it)

bluninja

24th December 2014, 10:49

I think people lose sight of the fact of human nature. It wouldn't matter what the speed limit was, many would want to exceed it, even if only by a few km/hr. I typically set my cruise control at around 101-102, why? Before the clampdown, I would set it at 104 to take advantage of the tolerance.

If large numbers of people are speeding then it suggests that the speed limit is wrong; your view of human nature is flawed and perhaps egocentric. Were your presumption correct then, in places where no speed limit applies, the following behaviours and consequences would be evidenced:-

1) Most people would drive or ride at the maximum speed of their vehicle.
2) The accident, death and injury rate on those roads would be higher than on speed restricted roads.

Some are very capable and very experienced and can drive/ride at a level well above the speed limit. The fact that they don't always know who they are, though, is testified by so many deaths where the driver/rider is solely to blame. Who judges one's capability?

Hmmmm...I guess that's why things are called accidents. The logical conclusions to your line of comment is that nobody should be allowed to ride/drive a vehicle, or that speed limits should be so low (like Bermuda 35kmh) that it's almost impossible to be killed in an accident.

Perhaps reading about Self Regulation (http://books.google.co.nz/books?hl=en&lr=&id=Zni96-wQfM0C&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=speed+self+regulation+research&ots=r2xF0wvA4w&sig=otVwfw0C4LZyk9NEBTTEJMilkS8&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=speed%20self%20regulation%20research&f=false)would remove the need for your cruise control and help broaden your horizons.

In the end, it is a fact of living in a society that we take the majority and/or authority view, and if you don't like it, you have two options. Break the rules and freely accept the consequences, or go and live somewhere else.

Nope...in a democratically elected government governed society there may be the initial 2 options...the third is revolution...... :cool:

Edbear

24th December 2014, 11:01

If large numbers of people are speeding then it suggests that the speed limit is wrong; your view of human nature is flawed and perhaps egocentric. Were your presumption correct then, in places where no speed limit applies, the following behaviours and consequences would be evidenced:-

1) Most people would drive or ride at the maximum speed of their vehicle.
2) The accident, death and injury rate on those roads would be higher than on speed restricted roads.

Hmmmm...I guess that's why things are called accidents. The logical conclusions to your line of comment is that nobody should be allowed to ride/drive a vehicle, or that speed limits should be so low (like Bermuda 35kmh) that it's almost impossible to be killed in an accident.

Perhaps reading about Self Regulation (http://books.google.co.nz/books?hl=en&lr=&id=Zni96-wQfM0C&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=speed+self+regulation+research&ots=r2xF0wvA4w&sig=otVwfw0C4LZyk9NEBTTEJMilkS8&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=speed%20self%20regulation%20research&f=false)would remove the need for your cruise control and help broaden your horizons.

Nope...in a democratically elected government governed society there may be the initial 2 options...the third is revolution...... :cool:

Large numbers of people are not speeding, that's my point. The speeders are relatively few. The majority are driving under the speed limit regardless what that limit is, be it 100, 80, 70 or 50km/h.

The speed of vehicles varies hugely on the unrestricted autobahn's of Germany where people can drive as they please. Few are going flat out or at very high speeds. The bigger issue there, is that Europeans are taught to drive properly and have to go through a much harder test to get their licence than here. The consequences of breaking the law and of having an accident are far more severe there, too. A higher standard all round!

Your "logical conclusion" to my post is rubbish.

Edbear

24th December 2014, 11:07

The best thing, IMHO, that the Govt. could do is to make it mandatory for all drivers/riders to be taught by a professional instructor and to take a Defensive Driving Course in order to get their licence.

Tourists should be able to produce a licence showing their experience and also pass a test before being allowed to drive here.

It won't cost us, as taxpayers, as it is user pays.

scumdog

24th December 2014, 11:21

Nope...in a democratically elected government governed society there may be the initial 2 options...the third is revolution...... :cool:

C'mon, get real - this IS NZ - and this is a motorcyclists site.

Combine the two and you have a bunch that can't find their own arse with both hands, let alone organise a revolution!:rofl::lol::killingme:shutup:

bluninja

24th December 2014, 11:24

Large numbers of people are not speeding, that's my point. The speeders are relatively few. The majority are driving under the speed limit regardless what that limit is, be it 100, 80, 70 or 50km/h.

The speed of vehicles varies hugely on the unrestricted autobahn's of Germany where people can drive as they please. Few are going flat out or at very high speeds. The bigger issue there, is that Europeans are taught to drive properly and have to go through a much harder test to get their licence than here. The consequences of breaking the law and of having an accident are far more severe there, too. A higher standard all round!

Your "logical conclusion" to my post is rubbish.

These posts appear to show your ignorance and your inability to structure a reasoned thought out argument too well.

When you mean speeders do you mean people exceeding the posted speed limit? or people exceeding the speed for the conditions (road, weather, visibility, driving competence, vehicle)?

When the stats show that speed is a factor in a road traffic accident is it that they were travelling above the posted speed? or too fast for the prevailing conditions?

Did you know that the Autobahn has speed restrictions? It is only on sections (typically fairly straight, no steep inclines, no on or off ramps) where it is unrestricted, the rest are set at what is considered a more appropriate level.

So Europeans are taught to drive "properly" and have to go through much harder tests? Do you have any evidence for this incorrect generality?

Also do you have evidence for the more severe penalties for breaking traffic laws (I've presumed we weren't talking all laws)?

Having been trained and licensed in the UK for driving and riding and having driven and ridden around most of Europe I can say with a degree of confidence that you are incorrect in your assertions. The only thing (anecdotally) specific to the UK and breaking traffic law that is more severe is being caught when banned or without a license.....even then the guy (I knew) was caught twice whilst banned before he got jail time.

As for your "rubbish" claim....can you describe the flaw in the logic?

Scuba_Steve

24th December 2014, 11:49

The best thing, IMHO, that the Govt. could do is to make it mandatory for all drivers/riders to be taught by a professional instructor and to take a Defensive Driving Course in order to get their licence.

That's a load of crap, I'm not sure why people are so obsessed with training by professionals especially given what's being taught by the professionals doing the training currently... This is just a waste of money

All that needs to be done is a test that involves more than throwing $$$ at a company, a test which tests driving ability rather than financial status... You can either drive or not, who taught you is irrelevant & just because someones getting paid doesn't make them better

Edbear

24th December 2014, 11:58

These posts appear to show your ignorance and your inability to structure a reasoned thought out argument too well.

When you mean speeders do you mean people exceeding the posted speed limit? or people exceeding the speed for the conditions (road, weather, visibility, driving competence, vehicle)?

When the stats show that speed is a factor in a road traffic accident is it that they were travelling above the posted speed? or too fast for the prevailing conditions?

Did you know that the Autobahn has speed restrictions? It is only on sections (typically fairly straight, no steep inclines, no on or off ramps) where it is unrestricted, the rest are set at what is considered a more appropriate level.

So Europeans are taught to drive "properly" and have to go through much harder tests? Do you have any evidence for this incorrect generality?

Also do you have evidence for the more severe penalties for breaking traffic laws (I've presumed we weren't talking all laws)?

Having been trained and licensed in the UK for driving and riding and having driven and ridden around most of Europe I can say with a degree of confidence that you are incorrect in your assertions. The only thing (anecdotally) specific to the UK and breaking traffic law that is more severe is being caught when banned or without a license.....even then the guy (I knew) was caught twice whilst banned before he got jail time.

As for your "rubbish" claim....can you describe the flaw in the logic?

Sigh...

1/ That should be blindingly obvious from my post, since I was referring to all speed restrictions.

2/ Not necessarily either, obviously too fast for them to avoid the accident in any case.

3/ My Son-in-Law was brought up in Germany. Of course I know speed limits vary, who doesn't? What do you think of the various speed restrictions of other countries? You say a more realistic level than unlimited, yet you would seem to prefer being able to travel at whatever speed you personally want to, ie: unlimited by an authority.

4/ Are you serious? My comment was that many judge for themselves how competent they are and many are wrong.

Edbear

24th December 2014, 11:59

That's a load of crap, I'm not sure why people are so obsessed with training by professionals especially given what's being taught by the professionals doing the training currently... This is just a waste of money

All that needs to be done is a test that involves more than throwing $$$ at a company, a test which tests driving ability rather than financial status... You can either drive or not, who taught you is irrelevant & just because someones getting paid doesn't make them better

What is required to become a qualified professional driving instructor?

bluninja

24th December 2014, 12:39

Sigh...

1/ That should be blindingly obvious from my post, since I was referring to all speed restrictions.

2/ Not necessarily either, obviously too fast for them to avoid the accident in any case.

3/ My Son-in-Law was brought up in Germany. Of course I know speed limits vary, who doesn't? What do you think of the various speed restrictions of other countries? You say a more realistic level than unlimited, yet you would seem to prefer being able to travel at whatever speed you personally want to, ie: unlimited by an authority.

4/ Are you serious? My comment was that many judge for themselves how competent they are and many are wrong.

1) I asked for clarification. You've provided it. Thanks
2) Clearly you don't know what the stats are based on so your are waffling. Ministry of Transport defines as follows :- "Speed and crash risk
In this fact sheet speeding is defined as driving too fast for the conditions."
3a) You stated in the post that I responded to "The speed of vehicles varies hugely on the unrestricted autobahn's of Germany where people can drive as they please. " I inferred that "drive as they please" meant with regards to speed, rather than there were no traffic laws. However there is nothing in that post to indicate that you knew the autobahns had speed restrictions in places, rather it suggests that all the autobahn is unrestricted.
3b) nice try at grasping for the straw man argument but incorrect. I am for appropriate speed restrictions depending on the road and conditions.
4) You just made the point of a logical conclusion I made. If people judge for themselves how competent they are, and many are wrong, then it is a logical outcome (to reduce/stop road deaths) that we should prevent all from driving vehicles, or to restrict their maximum speed to a level that prevents death.

bluninja

24th December 2014, 12:44

What is required to become a qualified professional driving instructor?

Shifting the goal posts again...professional; someone who is paid.....qualified; officially recognised as being trained to perform a role.
It's possible to be qualified and amateur (ie not professional) such as IAM instructors/observers.

SPman

24th December 2014, 13:08

Also, IMO you can't cater to the lowest common denominator. You need to look at the average speed traveled and pick an 80th percentile. That is the safest speed limit. The 80th percentile recommendation is based on no upper speed limit restrictions - it's pointless using an 80th percentile if the speed limit is 100, and basing it on those who exceed that limit as a percentage of total drivers. 2/3rds will always be below or at the limit!

Brett

24th December 2014, 13:28

Most "professional" driving tutors themselves can't drive for shit. To put in bluntly.

Scuba_Steve

24th December 2014, 14:12

What is required to become a qualified professional driving instructor?

Money of-course... to get an endorsement on your licence. There's not much to it, it's probably easier than getting your restricted nowadays in all honesty.

Big Dog

24th December 2014, 14:24

In the end, it is a fact of living in a society that we take the majority and/or authority view, and if you don't like it, you have two options. Break the rules and freely accept the consequences, or go and live somewhere else.

Or you can set about playing within the framework to change the rules.

Or impotently complain on the internet.

The rules are the rules and they are the only thing that allows a thin painted line to keep separate two vehicles with lethal force that are traveling in differing directions.

Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

Big Dog

24th December 2014, 14:34

C'mon, get real - this IS NZ - and this is a motorcyclists site.

Combine the two and you have a bunch that can't find their own arse with both hands, let alone organise a revolution!:rofl::lol::killingme:shutup:
One of the tinfoil hats I used to work with was forever sharing conspiracy theories.

One I recall was the supposition:

What if the internet was introduced to stifle revolution?

Putting aside events in the Middle East most of us would agree the skills and motivation to organise a revolution are eroded as we become more motivated by discounted hobbies and facebook games that require huge amounts of time input for no tangible reward? *
As the time gets sucked I out of our lives do does our IRL social interaction, average standards of fitness willingness to live rough etc.

* especially true in countries where a standard of living once thought of as middle class is now thought below the poverty line.
Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

Edbear

24th December 2014, 15:30

1) I asked for clarification. You've provided it. Thanks
2) Clearly you don't know what the stats are based on so your are waffling. Ministry of Transport defines as follows :- "Speed and crash risk
In this fact sheet speeding is defined as driving too fast for the conditions."
3a) You stated in the post that I responded to "The speed of vehicles varies hugely on the unrestricted autobahn's of Germany where people can drive as they please. " I inferred that "drive as they please" meant with regards to speed, rather than there were no traffic laws. However there is nothing in that post to indicate that you knew the autobahns had speed restrictions in places, rather it suggests that all the autobahn is unrestricted.
3b) nice try at grasping for the straw man argument but incorrect. I am for appropriate speed restrictions depending on the road and conditions.
4) You just made the point of a logical conclusion I made. If people judge for themselves how competent they are, and many are wrong, then it is a logical outcome (to reduce/stop road deaths) that we should prevent all from driving vehicles, or to restrict their maximum speed to a level that prevents death.

Furry nerf, my problem with that definition on speed as a contributing factor is that it is too arbitrary, as it is as much about the driver's ability to handle those conditions as the conditions themselves. What is too fast for one, may be okay for another.

Shifting the goal posts again...professional; someone who is paid.....qualified; officially recognised as being trained to perform a role.
It's possible to be qualified and amateur (ie not professional) such as IAM instructors/observers.

True, I was thinking that a qualified driving instructor should have to logically qualify by some tested measure.

Money of-course... to get an endorsement on your licence. There's not much to it, it's probably easier than getting your restricted nowadays in all honesty.

Shame that.

Or you can set about playing within the framework to change the rules.

Or impotently complain on the internet.

The rules are the rules and they are the only thing that allows a thin painted line to keep separate two vehicles with lethal force that are traveling in differing directions.

Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

True again.

bluninja

24th December 2014, 16:43

Furry nerf, my problem with that definition on speed as a contributing factor is that it is too arbitrary, as it is as much about the driver's ability to handle those conditions as the conditions themselves. What is too fast for one, may be okay for another.

I think the thing to focus on is the emboldened bit. Speed is not the causal factor it contributes; an error, a lapse, a poor decision that may have left the opportunity to not collide is lost or reduced depending on speed. Plus, as we all know, the faster the negative acceleration the bigger the mess.

The primary causes are seldom addressed due to being in the "too hard bin" or financially "unaffordable" (according to pollies and taxpayers). If they separated all traffic with a median barrier, removed uncontrolled T junctions and crossroads and replaced them with roundabouts or traffic lights, and made traffic systems in town all one ways they would reduce 80% (my guestimate) of the ability to have the fatal accidents that occur today in NZ. Forget enforcement, think road design and engineering.

Big Dog

24th December 2014, 17:12

I think the thing to focus on is the emboldened bit. Speed is not the causal factor it contributes; an error, a lapse, a poor decision that may have left the opportunity to not collide is lost or reduced depending on speed. Plus, as we all know, the faster the negative acceleration the bigger the mess.

The primary causes are seldom addressed due to being in the "too hard bin" or financially "unaffordable" (according to pollies and taxpayers). If they separated all traffic with a median barrier, removed uncontrolled T junctions and crossroads and replaced them with roundabouts or traffic lights, and made traffic systems in town all one ways they would reduce 80% (my guestimate) of the ability to have the fatal accidents that occur today in NZ. Forget enforcement, think road design and engineering.

Sounds more like rail system than roads.

Besides, all of that would not mitigate the single largest risk. Humans.

Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

Metastable

24th December 2014, 17:48

The 80th percentile recommendation is based on no upper speed limit restrictions - it's pointless using an 80th percentile if the speed limit is 100, and basing it on those who exceed that limit as a percentage of total drivers. 2/3rds will always be below or at the limit!

So as far as - 80th percentile....I think we are saying the same thing. So, a guy might be traveling at 500kph, but his high speed isn't going to affect the 80th percentile. 80th percentile is the speed where 80% of the people travel at or slower and 20% travel at or faster. In reality it is a median.

In other words, it's like when you take a test and you are in the 90th percentile. You might have achieved a grade of 50%, but still fallen in the 90th percentile.... which means it was a really hard test. :D

Anyway - I'm pretty sure we are on the same page as far as the definition goes... what you are saying is that because there is a speed limit, then some people that would otherwise drive faster, don't because the limit is present. True, that can skew the results for sure. Having said that there are some different circumstances. Take British Columbia where they increased speed limits recently. On some roads the limits were so ridiculous that very few people were actually driving the speed limit (i.e. everyone was driving faster than the limit). In cases such as those, it is pretty clear there is a problem.

In cases where few people are exceeding the limit, then maybe it isn't a huge problem. Maybe an engineering study would still recommend increasing the limit, and this would need to be monitored. Did the 80th percentile increase?.... If it goes up, then it might show the previous 80th percentile was being skewed as a result of the actual speed limit.

People will drive at a speed that is comfortable with. You can see that in New Zealand. There were lots of places where the speed limit was 100 and folks were no where near it. Same here, Utah has various sections of 80mph ~ 129kph.... most folks are not doing that speed. Their limits were increased for safety. Texas speeds on I-10 were 65mph, bumped to 70mph and now to 80mph. I drove it when it was 70mph and got a ticket for 84mph.... in the middle of nowhere with no traffic around. Cop told me it was the most dangerous road in the State. I asked why. "Because people fall asleep"..... :D Ironically that is why the bumped up the limit.... for safety... help keep people awake. Blah blah blah.... anyway, point being, again, many people drive well below the limit there too. :D

bluninja

24th December 2014, 18:24

Sounds more like rail system than roads.

Besides, all of that would not mitigate the single largest risk. Humans.

Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

The risk of human error still exists, but the possibility of a T bone or a head on, or a U turn in front of a 44 tonne logging truck are almost completely removed. You can choose your route and your speed (subject to the slowest vehicle in a single lane road until passing lane) so it is not like a rail system. The object is to separate traffic moving in different directions and traffic crossing the path of other traffic.

yevjenko

24th December 2014, 20:01

Set the open road speed limit at 90, 100, or 110 and you will still have the same arguments.

Therein lies the problem. Arbitrarily chosen speed limits are wrong. Choose a speed limit that is appropriate for the road and the vehicles that use it. Scientifically. And then sign post the hell out of it so no one is unaware of what the limit is

Tricky thing is to get them to realise they are not the best drivers and should therefore travel in the left hand lane!

Oh don't get me started on this... Arghhh

Not to mention that so many are driving on auto-pilot with their minds everywhere else!

Too many automatic cars in my opinion

In the end, it is a fact of living in a society that we take the majority and/or authority view, and if you don't like it, you have two options. Break the rules and freely accept the consequences, or go and live somewhere else.

You forgot the third option. Petition and nag and publicise as much as possible the research into what we should have and how.

AllanB

24th December 2014, 20:14

Tell you one thing that has changed in the last couple weeks - I'm one beer only if driving now (was two max) after the breath reduction at months start.

None on the bike and have always been that way. Odd I differ between car and bike - subconscious nod to the higher concentration/risk factor of motorcycling I guess.

Swoop

24th December 2014, 20:20

24th December 2014, 20:46

yevjenko

24th December 2014, 22:32

Can't be bothered reading all the pages of people going off on tangents. To answer the OP question.
Q: What slows me down.
A: anything that looks like a Commodore in the distance. Particularly white ones and now ugly red ones
Holden has a lot to answer for curtailing our liberties
This... Except in the south island it was a Mitsi...

And in Wellie I have seen Holden Cruz's, Nissan Maxima's... And I can't remember the other one...

swbarnett

25th December 2014, 12:51

Basically the road rules are in place to cater to the lowest common denominator.

Only way to improve the situation would be better rider/driver training and perhaps improving arterial roads (think autobahn) and very strict vehicle inspections, but that is very unlikely.
Not true. The ignorant wankers in power could use their brains for once and treat every case on it's merits. As in the example you stated:

passing a line of cars on double yellows on a modern 1000 quickly going from 120 to 220 isn't going to result in immediate death (provided visibility is not an issue).

Attempting the same in a Yaris with bicycle tyres and shit brakes and virtually no power to even be able to overtake on proper passing lanes would be another story alltogheter.
Throw the book at the latter whereas the former would be allowed to go about their business as they obviously endangered no-one.

caseye

25th December 2014, 14:57

So topics like this make me wonder...

Am I the only one who actually enjoys sticking to the speed limit (or even slightly under) for a nice scenic ride?

I had 2 bikes and 4 cars all getting whingey with me the other day for riding at 100 down the motorway. Yes, I'm going to stick to the speed limit and yes, im going to ride that limit in the right hand lane. Because that way I don't have to watch so many directions at once for crazy people trying to cut me off.

One day and sooner than you think you may well become a statistic, riding at 100 K's to enjoy the scenery, fine, if you are still maintaining your excellent all around swiveling head checks and keeping a safe distance away from the cars in front and of course (because you are in their fast lane) behind you.
Please for your own safety, do your 100 K scenery enjoying in the left lane and stay well back from the cars in front, this way you may not become a statistic as soon.
Ride your own ride, but don't deliberately piss other motorists off, remember you are riding a 2 wheeled motorised vehicle with NO Protection at all, these days annoyed car drivers have and are continuing to take swipes at people on bikes on a very regular basis.
Being right, is not as important as being alive.
Merry Christmas.

haydes55

25th December 2014, 15:44

Being right, is not as important as being alive.

But she's wrong and dangerously so.

Brett

25th December 2014, 16:27

So topics like this make me wonder...

Am I the only one who actually enjoys sticking to the speed limit (or even slightly under) for a nice scenic ride?

I had 2 bikes and 4 cars all getting whingey with me the other day for riding at 100 down the motorway. Yes, I'm going to stick to the speed limit and yes, im going to ride that limit in the right hand lane. Because that way I don't have to watch so many directions at once for crazy people trying to cut me off.

I can only assume that this is a troll post, if so...sarcasm needs to be heavier. If not, then I suggest that you sell your bike immediately and start using public tranport...as you're a hazard to yourself and others. In fact, sit down and stop moving before you hurt yourself. It is EXACTLY this sort of carry on that expedites people becoming statistics in the road toll. I won't even bother to go into all of the reasons why you're a hazard...sure you wouldn't get it anyway.

Metastable

25th December 2014, 17:29

I can only assume that this is a troll post, if so...sarcasm needs to be heavier. If not, then I suggest that you sell your bike immediately and start using public tranport...as you're a hazard to yourself and others. In fact, sit down and stop moving before you hurt yourself. It is EXACTLY this sort of carry on that expedites people becoming statistics in the road toll. I won't even bother to go into all of the reasons why you're a hazard...sure you wouldn't get it anyway.

Well, let's look on the bright side. Staying right would be perfect in a left hand drive country. :)

R650R

25th December 2014, 17:31

This... Except in the south island it was a Mitsi...

And in Wellie I have seen Holden Cruz's, Nissan Maxima's... And I can't remember the other one...

Hyundais.... then there's the unmarked Hilux, Colarado and crewman utes used by CVIU who will deal to ordinary motorists if their being bad enough...

Worst of all though is the self righteous joe blow with a cellphone and a marked patrol car waiting for you...

Those new shape camera vans are hard to spot, they look very people moverish....

swbarnett

26th December 2014, 06:54

Brett

26th December 2014, 09:17

Are you immune to the fallen tree or the U-turning cop?

If you were already cornering at a speed such that you couldn't stop in your visibility (or near to it) then increasing your corner speed only makes the corner more dangerous.

Did you miss the point of his post?

swbarnett

26th December 2014, 15:57

Did you miss the point of his post?
I don't believe I did. Please explain it to me it you think I did.

His point as I understand it is that you're safer going slower on the straights and faster in the corners. All while staying under the speed limit. This is simply not true unless you can always stop in your visibility.

Gremlin

26th December 2014, 17:16

Excitement in riding no longer comes from speed, now it's the riding itself and executing a nice smooth and safe ride. Plenty of enjoyment to be had within speed limits in the back roads. Anyone can twist the throttle on a straight stretch...

Are you immune to the fallen tree or the U-turning cop?

If you were already cornering at a speed such that you couldn't stop in your visibility (or near to it) then increasing your corner speed only makes the corner more dangerous.
Well I thought "nice smooth and safe ride" was reasonably straight forward and not requiring too much interpretation. Pretty sure that takes into account road debris, other road users etc.

Not sure where the assumptions come in about cornering at certain speeds, then increasing corner speed, making it dangerous yada yada. Nothing like that referenced. The thread is about what slows you down... I put forward my experience. I slowed down because of demerits, needed my licence and consequently adjusted my riding. I choose to abide by the limits.

swbarnett

26th December 2014, 17:27

Well I thought "nice smooth and safe ride" was reasonably straight forward and not requiring too much interpretation. Pretty sure that takes into account road debris, other road users etc.

Not sure where the assumptions come in about cornering at certain speeds, then increasing corner speed, making it dangerous yada yada. Nothing like that referenced. The thread is about what slows you down... I put forward my experience. I slowed down because of demerits, needed my licence and consequently adjusted my riding. I choose to abide by the limits.

Sorry if I misinterpreted what you posted. I can't remember exactly what it was but I got the impression that because you were now slower in the straights you'd compensated for this in the corners.

Can you please clarify - do you always corner at a speed at which you could stop within your visibility (or near to)?

My point was really about the fact that only straight line speed is policed. This leads to people slowing down in the straights and compensating for this in the corners (sorry again if this is not relevant to you personally). This leads to corner speeds that are too high to be safe under all circumstances. Hence, the overall level of rider safety is actually reduced.

Gremlin

26th December 2014, 17:47

Can you please clarify - do you always corner at a speed at which you could stop within your visibility (or near to)?
Yes.

Had a really good test of this in January this year (2014). Rounded a right hander somewhere on the East Cape (plenty of bush, poor sight lines etc). There was a driveway on the left side right after the corner, and basically half a second before I exited the corner a farmer pulled out of the driveway. Fair play to him, I was not there or visible when he looked and wanted to pull out. His front wheels were only just hitting the road.

If anything, I was a bit too calm. Braked firmly, increased time to react, he continued to pull out and once the rear exited the driveway I went around the back of the ute, dropped another gear or two and carried on. Good example of why you need to anticipate anything.

On the other hand, in the ute not far from New Plymouth, BMW on the back. Long sweeping corner, flat land, large gravel area on the left side and closing into a driveway. Some ute reverses out of the driveway (I'm seeing this before I've even entered the corner, doing about 95kph) and turns on the gravel. It's plainly obvious there are vehicles coming, but he just pulls out anyway across my lane and turning right. Rather than waste time braking and probably kill him anyway I aimed for the left hard shoulder (plus some gravel) and then back onto the road... Don't know if he even realised how close he came...

AllanB

26th December 2014, 18:55

Smooth is the new fast.

caspernz

26th December 2014, 19:39

Smooth is the new fast.

Has been for a long time hasn't it? :laugh::mellow:

26th December 2014, 19:42

Smooth is the new fast.

Been doing that for 30 years. Welcome to the party. Hasn't let me down. Ok, aside from a few broken bones here and there where my riding principal didn't perform as planned. But apart form that, and the sanitation, and road and law and order...it's working fine.

AllanB

26th December 2014, 20:32

Yeah. No news here been doing that for decades. Can't be fucked balancing on the edge of my seat dragging a knee point to point.

swbarnett

27th December 2014, 00:45

Smooth is the new fast.
Take two riders. Rider A corners at a speed that allows them to stop in their visibility (note STOP, not avoid an obstacle) but is a tad over the speed limit in the straights, say up to about 30 over. Rider B sticks to the limit on the straights but makes up for it by cornering faster. Both riders have the same average speed over the same journey. Two questions: Which is safer? Which gets the tickets in the current environment?

haydes55

27th December 2014, 06:27

unstuck

27th December 2014, 06:34

AllanB

27th December 2014, 07:33

BlackSheepLogic

27th December 2014, 08:52

Rider AB has dragged himself out of bed, the day is a stunner, no wind and heading towards 28 degrees. I'm going for a spin - to break in the new helmet I purchased myself for Christmas you understand :cool: A watchful will be kept on the dial with the numbers on it.

I was out on the bike Christmas day, roads were very quite and several police cruising on a road I usually see at most one.

What Helmet did you get?

GrayWolf

27th December 2014, 10:08

Rider D just cant be fucked with fools, and cruises on past riders A,B,C arguing with the rozza at the side of the road and has a really enjoyable ride knowing he can read all about the fools bad day on KB when he gets home.:2thumbsup

:cool::cool::cool:

Rider E also just cruises on past, plus has a bike that doesnt look like a 'rossi wannabe' owns it, carries on 'thumping' up the road, till out in the backroads where a pleasant afternoons ride will ensue.

Hugo Nougo

27th December 2014, 10:45

What slows me down?, good front brakes, haven't touched the rear since last century. Also someones rear seat unit, on the road past twin lakes lookout on the way to the rimutakas, stopped and propped it up under a sign off the road about 9.30am, the other thing that slowed me down this morning was as I took off south from the lookout I couldn't help but keep accelerating, until I saw a nice man in a police car coming up the hill, I say nice because I appreciate the warning rather than the ticket.

awayatc

27th December 2014, 11:35

Nice........?
he was doing something else,
or on his way to somewhere else more likely....

last reliable report of traffic cop being nice was last millennium. ...

swbarnett

27th December 2014, 11:58

Rider C rides above the speed limit on straights and in corners..... How can police distinguish between rider A and C? If there is a speed limit, there will always be the safe riders and drivers being ticketed.
True. Which of course brings us to the point that straight line speed as in my example is no determinant of how safe a rider is. Being above the limit on the straights may actually make one a safer rider. A speed limit is simply an ineffectual tool for the purpose.

swbarnett

27th December 2014, 12:03

last reliable report of traffic cop being nice was last millennium. ...
How's this - Doing 90kph in a 70 the cop coming towards me turned their lights on and then turned them off when I got below 70 and carried on their merry way.

Madness

27th December 2014, 12:04

Being above the limit on the straights may actually make one a safer rider.

Right. So following this logic, can one assume that the ultimate in safe riding in your opinion might be lane splitting above the posted speed limit where possible?

swbarnett

27th December 2014, 12:08

Right. So following this logic, can one assume that the ultimate in safe riding in your opinion might be lane splitting above the posted speed limit where possible?
Now you're just reading too much in to my statement. If you look hard you'll notice that I said "may". It all depends on context. My only point is that any kind of speed enforcement will catch both those that are and those that aren't.

scumdog

27th December 2014, 12:13

How's this - Doing 90kph in a 70 the cop coming towards me turned their lights on and then turned them off when I got below 70 and carried on their merry way.

I have heard similar such activity happens a lot more than most realise..apparently...:shutup::innocent:

Madness

27th December 2014, 12:15

Now you're just reading too much in to my statement. If you look hard you'll notice that I said "may". It all depends on context. My only point is that any kind of speed enforcement will catch both those that are and those that aren't.

One doesn't simply read too much into one of your statements. The self-justification in many of your posts is clear for all and sundry to see.

Might I suggest that any kind of speed enforcement will probably just catch those operating a vehicle at a speed higher than that of the posted limit and whether the operator of this vehicle is in your opinion safe, safer or perhaps unsafe is completely irrelevant. To argue otherwise is the realm of sandal-wearing hippies and dickheads that haven't learned how to play the game yet.

scumdog

27th December 2014, 12:21

Flip

27th December 2014, 12:57

Think I will go for a spin in the low reflected radar car with the rozza detector and a radio to listen to the rozzas vile FM eminations. Just to see who is out on patrol on the east cape.

AllanB

27th December 2014, 13:01

Might I suggest that any kind of speed enforcement will probably just catch those operating a vehicle at a speed higher than that of the posted limit and whether the operator of this vehicle is in your opinion safe, safer or perhaps unsafe is completely irrelevant. To argue otherwise is the realm of sandal-wearing hippies and dickheads that haven't learned how to play the game yet.

Well sais - that's a given right?????? Surely? The old officer I was in the engines 'sweet spot' does not cut it when pulled over (did it ever?).

I was behaving today (roads were busy) the worst case of dickisum I witnessed was 140 kms later after I'd topped up with fuel and 1.5 kms from home - bunch of T-shirt wearing hero's on American iron doing 70 plus in a 60 passing multiple vehicles into incoming traffic on centerlines and a blind corner. Would have served them right it someone in front turned right .... or one was a mufti cop.

scumdog

27th December 2014, 14:32

Think I will go for a spin in the low reflected radar car with the rozza detector and a radio to listen to the rozzas vile FM eminations. Just to see who is out on patrol on the east cape.

There was an article in the ODT where a reporter went out with the cop.
They stopped a few for bad driving and a few for speeding.
Cop said home-grown bad drivers way outnumbered imported ones.

The fastest speed the cop got somebody for was 123kph.
The idiot had a radar detector.
And his cruise-control set at 110kph.
Way to go!!!:rolleyes::facepalm::weird:

awayatc

27th December 2014, 14:39

I have heard similar such activity happens a lot more than most realise..apparently...:shutup::innocent:

Just rumors.....;)

when I was catching a ride in the back of mr plods vehicle...
(Non traffic related)
He would toggle lights at speedsters when squackbox went off...
he wasn't being friendly....
He was just
A.busy
B. Not a traffic cop

have been toggled myself a few times as well.....
Last millenium....

awa355

27th December 2014, 14:39

" What slows me down??" An empty fuel tank usually. :banana::banana:

Edbear

27th December 2014, 15:10

One doesn't simply read too much into one of your statements. The self-justification in many of your posts is clear for all and sundry to see.

Might I suggest that any kind of speed enforcement will probably just catch those operating a vehicle at a speed higher than that of the posted limit and whether the operator of this vehicle is in your opinion safe, safer or perhaps unsafe is completely irrelevant. To argue otherwise is the realm of sandal-wearing hippies and dickheads that haven't learned how to play the game yet.

Yes it is irrelevant as the detecters are not programmed to distinguish between good and bad drivers. Only those going faster than the limit.

As has been noted though, it's a very personal thing to judge whether one is a competent or incompetent driver /rider and the gravestones testify to the fact that many who judge themselves competent were somewhat short of the mark.

Cops have to be unbiased and treat everyone equally. So to complain that one was completely safe doing high speeds is bound to get a "Yeah, right!" response.

Considering the number of accidents that happen below the speed limit by incompetence, I would question the wisdom of raising it.

Maybe I am too old but while I may prefer to travel at much higher speeds, I can accept the current limit simply because of the vast number of drivers on the roads who are unsafe at any speed.

Katman

27th December 2014, 15:29

As has been noted though, it's a very personal thing to judge whether one is a competent or incompetent driver /rider and the gravestones testify to the fact that many who judge themselves competent were somewhat short of the mark.

Was there any trace of Tramadol in your system when you had your accident Ed?

scumdog

27th December 2014, 15:49

As has been noted though, it's a very personal thing to judge whether one is a competent or incompetent driver /rider and the gravestones testify to the fact that many who judge themselves competent were somewhat short of the mark.

C'mon Ed, NOBODY on here is going to admit they're not an 'above average' rider - capable of safe higher speeds than the law allows!

unstuck

27th December 2014, 16:20

C'mon Ed, NOBODY on here is going to admit they're not an 'above average' rider - capable of safe higher speeds than the law allows!

I KNOW i'm a crap rider, tis why I am still alive I reckon.:bleh:

bluninja

27th December 2014, 16:22

As has been noted though, it's a very personal thing to judge whether one is a competent or incompetent driver /rider and the gravestones testify to the fact that many who judge themselves competent were somewhat short of the mark.

I've seen a gravestone with "I told you I was sick" but not any gravestones that suggest driver incompetence. I think this is just made homily type rubbish with no evidence to support the statement.

bluninja

27th December 2014, 16:30

C'mon Ed, NOBODY on here is going to admit they're not an 'above average' rider - capable of safe higher speeds than the law allows!

Statistically there will be many on here that are above average riders who exceed the posted limit:cool: I guess there are some police who think they are above average riders/drivers capable of safe higher speeds, despite the accidents caused during high speed pursuits. :killingme

swbarnett

27th December 2014, 16:34

One doesn't simply read too much into one of your statements.
Well, you clearly missed the significance of the word "may". Perhaps you need grammar lessons.

Might I suggest that any kind of speed enforcement will probably just catch those operating a vehicle at a speed higher than that of the posted limit and whether the operator of this vehicle is in your opinion safe, safer or perhaps unsafe is completely irrelevant.
I see you agree, then, that speed enforcement has nothing to do with safety.

To argue otherwise is the realm of sandal-wearing hippies and dickheads that haven't learned how to play the game yet.
This statement clearly identifies you as a right-fighter. The actual truth (be that your side, my side or somewhere in the middle) holds no interest for you I assume?

scumdog

27th December 2014, 16:38

Statistically there will be many on here that are above average riders who exceed the posted limit:cool: I guess there are some police who think they are above average riders/drivers capable of safe higher speeds, despite the accidents caused during high speed pursuits. :killingme

You talking about the pursued - or the pursuee??

Definitely the pursued 'think' they're the better driver on every occassion!:bleh:

bluninja

27th December 2014, 16:49

You talking about the pursued - or the pursuee??

Definitely the pursued 'think' they're the better driver on every occassion!:bleh:

The ones that get away unscathed clearly are :innocent:

jasonu

27th December 2014, 16:56

Was there any trace of Tramadol in your system when you had your accident Ed?

You are a stalker.

scumdog

27th December 2014, 16:57

The ones that get away unscathed clearly are :innocent:

But not the dead ones....;)

R650R

27th December 2014, 17:05

Take two riders. Rider A corners at a speed that allows them to stop in their visibility (note STOP, not avoid an obstacle) but is a tad over the speed limit in the straights, say up to about 30 over. Rider B sticks to the limit on the straights but makes up for it by cornering faster. Both riders have the same average speed over the same journey. Two questions: Which is safer? Which gets the tickets in the current environment?

Despite your quest to answer every question in life with dissection via your multi quote replies you've created a corrupt set of data here so your question is moot.
Time spent cornering is a very small portion of any journey. It is not possible for the two riders described to have the same average speed unless rider A is obstructing rider B.
Both are equal risk, they are just exposed to different risk factors/elements.
Both will get tickets, A for speeding, and B careless use when they inevitably crash....

Katman

27th December 2014, 17:31

You are a stalker.

So shoot me cocksucker.

Flip

27th December 2014, 17:37

There was an article in the ODT where a reporter went out with the cop.
They stopped a few for bad driving and a few for speeding.
Cop said home-grown bad drivers way outnumbered imported ones.

The fastest speed the cop got somebody for was 123kph.
The idiot had a radar detector.
And his cruise-control set at 110kph.
Way to go!!!:rolleyes::facepalm::weird:

Only saw one pink skin. Decided to light me up in the middle of a 8km section of winding road:wacko:.Don't those snakes get some training in correct use of a Radar gun? I knew he was around my detector had been chirping for 5 min.

jasonu

27th December 2014, 17:45

So shoot me cocksucker.

Hopefully someone will do just that. Surprising it hasn't already happened.

Madness

27th December 2014, 17:47

Perhaps you need grammar lessons.

Perhaps you need a kick in the face.

I see you agree, then, that speed enforcement has nothing to do with safety.

Fuck off, Noddy.

The actual truth (be that your side, my side or somewhere in the middle) holds no interest for you I assume?

This statement clearly identifies you as a sandal wearing dickhead. Still, nothing new there.

scumdog

27th December 2014, 18:20

Edbear

27th December 2014, 19:48

I've seen a gravestone with "I told you I was sick" but not any gravestones that suggest driver incompetence. I think this is just made homily type rubbish with no evidence to support the statement.

It is a bit tricky asking the deceased what they think of their driving skill...

Was there any trace of Tramadol in your system when you had your accident Ed?

Don't be stupid... Oh, wait...

For the benefit of those who can think, I had no drugs of any kind in my system nor any alcohol. It was as a result of the accident that I have to take strong painkillers in order to stand up.

You are a stalker.

Just can't help himself...

buggerit

27th December 2014, 20:09

[QUOTE=Edbear;1130809733

For the benefit of those who can think, I had no drugs of any kind in my system nor any alcohol. It was as a result of the accident that I have to take strong painkillers in order to stand up.

.[/QUOTE]

They say Viagra is quite good:innocent:

Edbear

27th December 2014, 20:46

They say Viagra is quite good:innocent:

Don't need Viagra, only a glimpse of the Missus is enough...

unstuck

28th December 2014, 06:40

Don't need Viagra, only a glimpse of the Missus is enough...

So you have the mental control of a horny schoolboy then? :msn-wink:

P.S. Do not take Viagra if you have had any issues with your heart.:nono:

Brett

28th December 2014, 12:21

I have heard similar such activity happens a lot more than most realise..apparently...:shutup::innocent:

Yep, I have had a few instances where the copper flicks the discos on and off...including one that he could have actually gotten me into a lot of trouble for. To some, all Police will always be arseholes regardless. I have had encounters with some absolutely shocking coppers on an insane ego/power trip (one when I was a young guy around 19 or so, (got pulled over for not indicating while changing lanes late one night around 1130pm. Cop tried to accuse me of dangerous driving and when I politely said "sir, I acknowledge not indicating while changing lanes, but there were no other cars around, I don't think dangerous driving is a fair charge" he then started ranting and raving about young drivers and how he V8 was so much faster than most Jap sports cars, and then said that if I wanted to argue some more, he was going to arrest me. Wanker.) To the corollary, I have encountered some most excellent cops too. Like any profession, you get the good ones and the horrendous ones.

roogazza

28th December 2014, 12:23

Only saw one pink skin. Decided to light me up in the middle of a 8km section of winding road:wacko:.Don't those snakes get some training in correct use of a Radar gun? I knew he was around my detector had been chirping for 5 min.
I was on SH57 South of Palmy, Boxing day . Detector was chirping for 3 or 4 kms. Finally found space to get by a 90 k safe driver and up to 107 whoa and there was the policeman ! I thought thats me, but just got a wave. Good boy, common sense prevailed.

but yeah ,policemen slow me down i guess,not that I scream around.

FJRider

28th December 2014, 12:34

I was on SH57 South of Palmy, Boxing day . Detector was chirping for 3 or 4 kms. Finally found space to get by a 90 k safe driver and up to 107 whoa and there was the policeman ! I thought thats me, but just got a wave. Good boy, common sense prevailed.

but yeah ,policemen slow me down i guess,not that I scream around.

Here in Paradise ... most plod seem to be parked up under the shade of a roadside tree. I guess that makes it easier on their cars Air-Con ...

swbarnett

28th December 2014, 13:25

Despite your quest to answer every question in life with dissection via your multi quote replies you've created a corrupt set of data here so your question is moot.
Don't take it too literally. It's a hypothetical situation to illustrate that straight line speed is no indicator of the rider's risk level on the day.

Time spent cornering is a very small portion of any journey.
Depends on what stretch of road is being considered. For example, a set of corners that run one into another has no straights at all. I do take your point though. On an "average" journey what you

It is not possible for the two riders described to have the same average speed unless rider A is obstructing rider B.
Admittedly a very controlled situation but I've seen it on the track. One rider passes the other in the corners whereas the other has the faster bike and passes on the straights.

Both are equal risk, they are just exposed to different risk factors/elements.
Only if you buy the speed kills rhetoric.

Both will get tickets, A for speeding, and B careless use when they inevitably crash....
The guys that hit a cop in the south island didn't get ticketed IIRC.

swbarnett

28th December 2014, 13:27

Yada, yada, yada ....
I see you agree with me.

FJRider

28th December 2014, 13:40

Swoop

28th December 2014, 16:07

I had 2 bikes and 4 cars all getting whingey with me the other day for riding at 100 down the motorway. Yes, I'm going to stick to the speed limit and yes, im going to ride that limit in the right hand lane. Because that way I don't have to watch so many directions at once for crazy people trying to cut me off.
To re-visit your original post, once again, due to an author who made a comment in his book that reminded me of you and many others who infest our highways.
"... it's virtually impossible to make ... progress on the motorway because the outside lane is a permanent home for the sanctimonious, the belligerent and the stupid.
The sanctimonious won't let you past because they can't see why anyone should drive fast in these days of global warming; the belligerent won't let you past because it would suggest you are better than them; and the stupid don't know you're there." (Clarkson. J. 2011)
So. Which type are you?

What slows me down?, good front brakes, haven't touched the rear since last century.
Learn to use your rear, at the right times...

rastuscat

28th December 2014, 17:08

I have had encounters with some absolutely shocking coppers on an insane ego/power trip .............................To the corollary, I have encountered some most excellent cops too. Like any profession, you get the good ones and the horrendous ones.

Interesting observation of yours.

I work with some people who I wouldn't want to be dealing with the public due their lack of tact, tolerance and common sense.

I also work with some people who show the patience of a saint when they deal with people who are acting like spoiled children.

It's called being human. Sometimes it's the fault of the cop, but sometimes it's the fault of the driver with the chip on his shoulder.

On balance, most folk I deal with are pretty damn fine people who have a sometimes shitty job to do.

Just my observations back.

Edbear

28th December 2014, 17:09

So you have the mental control of a horny schoolboy then? :msn-wink:

P.S. Do not take Viagra if you have had any issues with your heart.:nono:

Ummmm, no. I'm well past that stage now. ;)

R650R

28th December 2014, 17:34

Only if you buy the speed kills rhetoric.

The message (rhetoric) is an over simplified one but you cant argue it. MC2 and all. The thing is cops are talking about speed when things go wrong, where as joe blow keyboard grand prix champion only talks about speed in every instance until the last milliseconds before a crash being cool.

Lets say someone invented a physical crash simulator that ran on a set of rails. You could ride it with whatever safety gear you want. At point x it would automatically eject the rider.
You could choose to ride this machine at either 100k or 160k, which one would you choose. Oh btw there will be roadside furniture, trees etc to keep it real....

Something like deathrace movie :)

http://onlinemovies.pro/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Death-Race-2008-poster.jpg

Scuba_Steve

28th December 2014, 18:08

Lets say someone invented a physical crash simulator that ran on a set of rails. You could ride it with whatever safety gear you want. At point x it would automatically eject the rider.
You could choose to ride this machine at either 100k or 160k, which one would you choose. Oh btw there will be roadside furniture, trees etc to keep it real....

160km/h... lets face it you're fucked at either speed so might as well have some fun on the way out :msn-wink:

bluninja

28th December 2014, 18:26

The message (rhetoric) is an over simplified one but you cant argue it. MC2 and all. The thing is cops are talking about speed when things go wrong, where as joe blow keyboard grand prix champion only talks about speed in every instance until the last milliseconds before a crash being cool.

Lets say someone invented a physical crash simulator that ran on a set of rails. You could ride it with whatever safety gear you want. At point x it would automatically eject the rider.
You could choose to ride this machine at either 100k or 160k, which one would you choose. Oh btw there will be roadside furniture, trees etc to keep it real....

Something like deathrace movie :)

http://onlinemovies.pro/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Death-Race-2008-poster.jpg

Of course you can argue it...and be totally correct. Increased speed reduces the time to react and increases the stopping distance; fact. However the "over simplified" adage that you should "ride at a speed that allows you to stop in the distance that you can see to be clear" allows one to select an appropriate speed (sometimes above the posted limit) and not have an accident.

There's already crash simulators, and even little demo models the road safety tem in the UK had for major public events where they strap you in and then roll you down the rails at about 6kmh and then stop you suddenly, so you can feel what a high G stop feels like from a slow speed. Why go for the high tech approach? just get up to speed on your bike and then pull the front brake lever on as hard and as fast as you can and don't release.

You can always choose not to ride the machine, just like you can choose to ride a bike with or without your brain engaged. Regardless of speed you will be more likely to crash if you don't engage your brain and drive to the conditions. If you don't crash, speed doesn't matter.

The remade death race movie...preferred the original.

awayatc

28th December 2014, 18:31

Did ride at 100 kph........

the most boring 3 minutes of my life.....

may as well sell the bike if that's all you are ever supposed to do....

slitting wrists doesn't sound so bad anymore....

my diesel ute slows me down....
Bikes..... .?

get fucked......

happy new year

Flip

30th December 2014, 19:01

Just got in from a 600ish km ride around the east cape.

Didnt see one scrote and there was only one asshole camera van near Matawai.

xenothius

31st December 2014, 13:11

i always ride to the conditions (weather, road, traffic, alertness, etc) and usually not under or on the posted limit, :o (unless conditions require)
never been pulled over and never had a speed camera ticket (touch wood)

Brett

3rd January 2015, 15:28

Interesting observation of yours.

I work with some people who I wouldn't want to be dealing with the public due their lack of tact, tolerance and common sense.

I also work with some people who show the patience of a saint when they deal with people who are acting like spoiled children.

It's called being human. Sometimes it's the fault of the cop, but sometimes it's the fault of the driver with the chip on his shoulder.

On balance, most folk I deal with are pretty damn fine people who have a sometimes shitty job to do.

Just my observations back.

I definitely pity you decent cops the morons that you must have to deal with. Some people are so self-entitled and so arrogant that you must literally want to give them a good smack with a gloved fist sometimes! Would take a lot of patience at times.

AllanB

3rd January 2015, 15:34

Some people are so self-entitled and so arrogant that you must literally want to give them a good smack with a gloved fist sometimes! Would take a lot of patience at times.

I could propose that if the police were allowed one smack as law, maybe some of those arses would be more polite. I can remember when young (13-14 ish) hanging with some mates around the corner shops a copper arrived (looking for donuts?) and one of the group made some stupid comment - cop gave us a lecture, mate continued his lip and the cop spun him around and gave him one swift kick up the arse. Apologizes flowed from said mate - respect was given the police from then on.

Brett

3rd January 2015, 15:35

On the topic of cops...some are the worst bloody hypocrites regarding speed too! Observations from the passed several years:

1) cop who challenged me to a race through the Karangahake Gorge while it was closed due to an overturned truck at the entrance. It was fun, I was grateful.

2) A relative who is a copper overtook me on a rural back road of Taranaki at 220+kph in his V8.

3) Several copper bikers I have known over the years who regularly used to see "jail time" speeds on rides.

To be fair, I think it would be these folk who would use common sense when looking to pull over other speeders though. Ie - the bloke going 125kph up an overtaking lane.

Brett

3rd January 2015, 15:42

I could propose that if the police were allowed one smack as law, maybe some of those arses would be more polite. I can remember when young (13-14 ish) hanging with some mates around the corner shops a copper arrived (looking for donuts?) and one of the group made some stupid comment - cop gave us a lecture, mate continued his lip and the cop spun him around and gave him one swift kick up the arse. Apologizes flowed from said mate - respect was given the police from then on.

Haha...reminds me of another Police story.

Several years ago, i was very keen on joining the plods. Went along for an evening with a cop mate. Were patrolling central when we picked up some dumbarse for car theft and destruction of property. Rocked up to Police Central to process him and at the same time, some young dick head from the Killer Beez had been caught having done a runner in a stolen car. Cops dragged the sorry little prick into the station and he starts giving them real rude lip. The one cop responded that if he drove as well as he gave cheek he may not have been caught. This set the little fire cracker of a wanker off on a real rant wanting to fight anyone around. (Basically started kicking out trying to hit anyone in range and yelling "come on then, I will fuck you's up"). One of the Senior Sergeants responded with an "Ok then" and instructed his cable tie cuffs be released. With little warning he launched into the thug and gave him a real beating. The cunt then fell on the floor crying and yelling "I'm sorry my bosses, I'm sorry". They then threw his arse into a cell.

I just thought that the whole thing was bloody hilarious. Served the arrogant prick right.

FJRider

3rd January 2015, 15:48

Scuba_Steve

3rd January 2015, 19:40

The law in itself hasn't changed .. the "My rights are more important than your rights" era arrived.

Maybee you missed the whole "anti-smacking" legislation...

Big Dog

4th January 2015, 01:29

Maybee you missed the whole "anti-smacking" legislation...

Only applies to children, no?

Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

Scuba_Steve

4th January 2015, 07:09

Only applies to children, no?

Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

Don't know, never read it... But usually they're not that specific

roogazza

4th January 2015, 08:22

3) Several copper bikers I have known over the years who regularly used to see "jail time" speeds on rides.

To be fair, I think it would be these folk who would use common sense when looking to pull over other speeders though. Ie - the bloke going 125kph up an overtaking lane.

Coppers are human too huh ?
I don't have old mates on here,but they could tell a few tales.
Never did Traffic, (so never wrote a ticket in my life) .
My job was 10 years in training,then general catching of baddies. Quite proud of that.;)

Brett

4th January 2015, 08:49

Coppers are human too huh ?
I don't have old mates on here,but they could tell a few tales.
Never did Traffic, (so never wrote a ticket in my life) .
My job was 10 years in training,then general catching of baddies. Quite proud of that.;)

Pretty much THE reason that I ended up deciding not to go to work in the NZ Police was the realisation that I was at odds with our road policing policies. Other than that:

1) Would LOVE to work in the community.
2) Would LOVE to help by working in a community focused role that helps to protect others and keep NZ a safe place.
3) Specifically would have liked to get into a AOS / STG role, as some of the training I have already done has shown this to be an area of both significant interest to me and a skillset that I have a natural inclination towards.

If I never had to work in traffic enforcement pushing the speed kills message, I would still consider making the switch (am only 30, so still time for a career change...again) even though I would earn significantly less, have to work shift, be generally hated by half of the public yada yada yada. I just personally would struggle to enforce a law/policy that i think is not adequately targeted at the root issue.

roogazza

4th January 2015, 09:50

Pretty much THE reason that I ended up deciding not to go to work in the NZ Police was the realisation that I was at odds with our road policing policies. Other than that:

1) Would LOVE to work in the community.
2) Would LOVE to help by working in a community focused role that helps to protect others and keep NZ a safe place.
3) Specifically would have liked to get into a AOS / STG role, as some of the training I have already done has shown this to be an area of both significant interest to me and a skillset that I have a natural inclination towards.

If I never had to work in traffic enforcement pushing the speed kills message, I would still consider making the switch (am only 30, so still time for a career change...again) even though I would earn significantly less, have to work shift, be generally hated by half of the public yada yada yada. I just personally would struggle to enforce a law/policy that i think is not adequately targeted at the root issue.
You could still do it at 30 , just use your discretion, though you may ruffle feathers !!
Discretion,great word, I used life skills I had and with age gathered many more.
I like the never back down ethic !!!( an older cop wrote a book with that title.)

R650R

5th January 2015, 16:50

Pretty much THE reason that I ended up deciding not to go to work in the NZ Police was the realisation that I was at odds with our road policing policies. Other than that:
If I never had to work in traffic enforcement pushing the speed kills message, I would still consider making the switch (am only 30, so still time for a career change...again) even though I would earn significantly less, have to work shift, be generally hated by half of the public yada yada yada. I just personally would struggle to enforce a law/policy that i think is not adequately targeted at the root issue.

Did you actually apply to get in... I don't think your underlying attitude would get past the front door of recruitment office...

Traffic is actually a specialised role, you have to be an ordinary cop before you can apply to be a highway patrol. The rest of them are to busy wife wife bashers and shoplifters to be worried about writing out speed tickets.

Brett

5th January 2015, 17:18

Did you actually apply to get in... I don't think your underlying attitude would get past the front door of recruitment office...

Traffic is actually a specialised role, you have to be an ordinary cop before you can apply to be a highway patrol. The rest of them are to busy wife wife bashers and shoplifters to be worried about writing out speed tickets.

Yes I did, got a long way down the recruitment process. You also go on rotations to different units...ergo, many probationary constables have to do a spell in traffic. Curious as to what "underlying attitude" you're referring to. My disagreement with the party line on targeting speed as the key element in making our roads safer?

FJRider

5th January 2015, 17:24

Maybee you missed the whole "anti-smacking" legislation...

If I thought you adhered to all legislation ... regarding posted speed limits ... I might agree you had a point. How many children (infants) died last at the hands (literally) of their own family members ... ???

Those family members believed they had the right to do as they did. Some even got away with it ...

Brett

5th January 2015, 17:32

Time spent cornering is a very small portion of any journey. It is not possible for the two riders described to have the same average speed unless rider A is obstructing rider B.
Both are equal risk, they are just exposed to different risk factors/elements.
Both will get tickets, A for speeding, and B careless use when they inevitably crash....

With respect, what a load of rubbish! Don't know which roads you drive on, but there are many sections of roads where you can spend 30-45 mins of an hour journey going through corners, some rather tight twisties.

I am sure we are all familiar with the straight line warriors who then cannot corner a bike or car to save themselves. Equally, I have ridden with guys on older bikes that can ride like hero's in the corners, but would be lucky to reach on a straight what my CBR1000rr could do in first gear. Argument is rather flawed.

Flip

9th January 2015, 08:04

http://i.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/comment/64786447/Police-erode-public-faith-with-zero-tolerance-zeal

lukemc1878

9th January 2015, 17:57

the thing that slows me down is either, police, speed limits or the fact I live in Chch and alot of the roads have became potholes and washgridded

Latte

26th February 2015, 11:58

You talking about the pursued - or the pursuee??

Definitely the pursued 'think' they're the better driver on every occassion!:bleh:

Had to respond - the pursuee is the pursued. The other particpant is the pursuer.

Oh, and is Smokey and The Bandit compulsory viewing at the Police Academy?

willytheekid

26th February 2015, 14:15

Speed - what slows you down? (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/171907-Speed-what-slows-you-down)
:blink:...my brakes?...da faq are you guys using? :confused:

unstuck

26th February 2015, 14:33

TIT's always slow down for tits.:shifty:

TheDemonLord

26th February 2015, 14:51

TIT's always slow down for tits.:shifty:

Unstuck - the Greatest Ornithologist on KB:

http://www.rspb.org.uk/Images/blue_tit_master_tcm9-17216.jpg

Gremlin

26th February 2015, 15:06

TIT's always slow down for tits.:shifty:
No, that's for crashes... a mate remembers well... what was a seemingly very simple corner I turned into a very complex one, when I noticed bikini clad chickies down a side road right before the corner... :sweatdrop

unstuck

26th February 2015, 15:38

No, that's for crashes... a mate remembers well... what was a seemingly very simple corner I turned into a very complex one, when I noticed bikini clad chickies down a side road right before the corner... :sweatdrop

I crashed the DOC ute into the back of a taxi by the trout in Gore cos of a nice big bouncy pair.:o

Banditbandit

27th February 2015, 08:34

I'm sure DoC thought that was a valid excuse ...

unstuck

27th February 2015, 08:55

I'm sure DoC thought that was a valid excuse ...

Nah, had to reword the statement on the insurance forms, gave the girls at head office a chuckle though. $3800 damage to the hilux and 50c dent in the boot of the commodore taxi.:shit:

Old Steve

27th February 2015, 13:44

I have a high scepticism level regarding speed enforcement. I ride with an awareness of my surroundings, I may creep over the speed limit, but my main focus is on riding safe and being aware of hazards I may encounter.

One summer holiday weekend was riding on SH30 from Kawerau towards Rotorua. Came down out of the twisties and into the first township, Rotoehu. Wide road, cars parked on both sides of the road, kids everywhere playing in the front yards, people on the lakeside, no other traffic on the road so I stuck to the right of my lane, posted 80 km/hr. Kept a good look out for anything going pear shaped, but got a camera ticket for 84 km/hr.

Argued that in the circumstances it was better for me to concentrate on the surrounding hazards, kids running out across the road, people opening car doors, etc, than to be riding with my eyes glued to the speedo. Ticket stood. There are good Police in the Highway Patrol out there, poor buggers will certainly be the first attenders at accidents , but some of the drongos sitting behind a desk need some exposure in the real world.

I still maintain that I'm safer at 110 km/hr in a 100 zone if I'm aware of my surroundings than if I'm gazing at my speedo and keeping my speed down to 100 km/hr.

And at 110 km/hr I am NOT 21% more likely to die! IF I have an accident then I do have 21% more energy and that could equate to a 21% greater chance of injury or death - but that's only a possibility. If I have an accident it's possible I will be injured or die. But the increase of 10 km/hr DOES NOT increase the probability of my having an accident, in fact the gyroscopic forces on my wheels will mean that my bike is 21% more stable. So the possibility of my dying is not increased by the probability of my having an accident, so the increased overall probability of my injury or death because I'm doing 10% over the speed limit is next to zero!

Some Plods need to take Statistics and Physics 101 before they start trying to justify the force's speed enforcement policy - that last rant is really aimed at two Highway Patrol officers working just south of Marlborough and the end of a 110 km/hr speed zone in tropical Queensland who steadfastly stated that I was going to die if I kept riding at 110 km/hr in the 100 km/hr zone. They also couldn't understand the vectors involved in me coming around a curve that showed me accelerating from 95 km/hr to 110 km/hr on their radar. They didn't understand that their radar only measured the linear speed component coming directly towards them, and as I came around the curve the proportion of my real speed in the vector directly towards them increased, yet I was not accelerating but going around the curve at a steady speed.

RANT OVER.

Old Steve

27th February 2015, 13:58

have a high scepticism level regarding speed enforcement.

One summer holiday weekend was riding on SH30 from Kawerau towards Rotorua. Came down out of the twisties and into the first township, Rotoehu. Wide road, but cars parked on both sides of the road, kids everywhere playing in the front yards, people on the lakeside, no other traffic on the road so I stuck to the right of my lane, posted 80 km/hr. Kept a good look out for anything going pear shaped, but got a camera ticket for 84 km/hr.

Argued that in the circumstances it was better for me to concentrate on the surrounding hazards, kids running out across the road, people opening car doors, etc, than to be riding with my eyes glued to the speedo. Ticket stood. There are good Police in the Highway Patrol out there, poor buggers will certainly be the first attenders at accidents , but some of the drongos sitting behind a desk need some exposure in the real world.

I still maintain that I'm safer at 110 km/hr in a 100 zone if I'm aware of my surroundings than if I'm gazing at my speedo and keeping my speed down to 100 km/hr.

And at 110 km/hr I am NOT 21% more likely to die! IF I have an accident then I do have 21% more energy and that could equate to a 21% greater chance of injury or death - but that's only a possibility. If I have an accident it's possible I will be injured or die. But the increase of 10 km/hr DOES NOT increase the probability of my having an accident, in fact the gyroscopic forces on my wheels will mean that my bike is 21% more stable. So the possibility of my dying is not increased by the probability of my having an accident, so the increased overall probability of my injury or death because I'm doing 10% over the speed limit is next to zero!

Some Plods need to take Statistics 101 before they start trying to justify the force's speed enforcement policy.

rocketman1

27th February 2015, 18:10

PS...sold my 1000cc Super sport because I found that I actually enjoyed "crusing" more than "racing" these days anyway! Very keen on a cafe racer atm.

Yeah sold my sold my Sports bike for a GS BMW for the same reason, + far more comfortable for longer rides. Just doesnt look cool like a Vrod or a sports bike.

scumdog

28th February 2015, 11:42

I still maintain that I'm safer at 110 km/hr in a 100 zone if I'm aware of my surroundings than if I'm gazing at my speedo and keeping my speed down to 100 km/hr.

So, without 'gazing' at your speedo how do you know you're actually doing 110kph??<_<

Edbear

28th February 2015, 13:32

So, without 'gazing' at your speedo how do you know you're actually doing 110kph??<_<

It beeps at 110..? :wacko:

swbarnett

28th February 2015, 16:10

So, without 'gazing' at your speedo how do you know you're actually doing 110kph??<_<
You can't. But you don't have to know your speed to the number to know that what you're doing is safe.

Jezxa

28th February 2015, 16:56

...
Some Plods need to take Statistics and Physics 101 before they start trying to justify the force's speed enforcement policy - that last rant is really aimed at two Highway Patrol officers working just south of Marlborough and the end of a 110 km/hr speed zone in tropical Queensland who steadfastly stated that I was going to die if I kept riding at 110 km/hr in the 100 km/hr zone. They also couldn't understand the vectors involved in me coming around a curve that showed me accelerating from 95 km/hr to 110 km/hr on their radar. They didn't understand that their radar only measured the linear speed component coming directly towards them, and as I came around the curve the proportion of my real speed in the vector directly towards them increased, yet I was not accelerating but going around the curve at a steady speed.

RANT OVER.

Idiots that can't understand the difference between speed and velocity should not be in the police force.

Also, you actually would have been safer if you were in fact accelerating from 95 km/hr to 110 km/hr through the corner because the bike is the most stable and the suspension works best when you're on the gas.