What is an acceptable speed on a public road?

**scumdog** · 14th February 2010, 20:11

Originally Posted by peasea

Such as this???

Sheesh, if ya couldn't spot that lot you should be checking in for your guide dog and white cane eh!

**FJRider** · 14th February 2010, 20:56

Originally Posted by Horney1

BS - Going slow increases your risk of falling asleep and being too late to react to a "situation". The faster you go, the more aware you are, the more your on edge you are, the faster you will react,

I'd be happy cruising at 200 and max'ing at the max but it's illegal. Speed does depend on situation, bike, traffic (including group rides & relative abilities/ experience), mood, weather, health & filth but it does not mean that posted speed limits a the safest speed you can go.

I recall reading about reaction times of formula one drivers ... around .25-.35 of a second. With reaction times of around .4 .5 of a second about average/good. This means that on a good day ... at 120 km/hr, you will cover around 33 metres Before you actually start the process of reacting to the situation. Be it braking or "mere" avoidence of the problem that has appeared.

Which means that anything that appears that is closer than 50 metres you will hit AT that speed ... before you react at all. How long will it take YOU to stop from 200 km/hr ... UNDER 50 metres would be GOOD. Which rule of thumb means ... that at 200 km/hr ... anything ahead of you out to 100 metres ... you have a GOOD chance of hitting (and ONLY if that object is NOT moving towards you).

Do you believe YOUR reaction times are as good as a formula one driver ... ???

**trailblazer** · 14th February 2010, 21:03

i ride a around the 110kph mark as i don't have the skills to go to fast and my bike wasn't designed for high speed.

**blue eyed savage** · 14th February 2010, 21:59

funny i talk to people that say that do 120ish and then out on the rides thay do at least 160. i say its what every u want. but 130 is good for a long trip but thats just me. if ur not happy with that go slower. 200+ is i bit fast for me just wish i had a track and could go fast all the time. 140 and u have to run from the cops and i dont want to be doing that, but i can see how it happends passing a truck on a zx10r.

**peasea** · 15th February 2010, 05:37

Originally Posted by scumdog

Sheesh, if ya couldn't spot that lot you should be checking in for your guide dog and white cane eh!

It's called sarcasm.

**Horney1** · 15th February 2010, 15:37

Originally Posted by FJRider

I recall reading about reaction times of formula one drivers ... around .25-.35 of a second. With reaction times of around .4 .5 of a second about average/good. This means that on a good day ... at 120 km/hr, you will cover around 33 metres Before you actually start the process of reacting to the situation. Be it braking or "mere" avoidence of the problem that has appeared.

Which means that anything that appears that is closer than 50 metres you will hit AT that speed ... before you react at all. How long will it take YOU to stop from 200 km/hr ... UNDER 50 metres would be GOOD. Which rule of thumb means ... that at 200 km/hr ... anything ahead of you out to 100 metres ... you have a GOOD chance of hitting (and ONLY if that object is NOT moving towards you).

Do you believe YOUR reaction times are as good as a formula one driver ... ???

-----------------

Firstly - I've run over enough possums and wallabies etc and had to emergency brake over blind crests for flocks of sheep, packs of dogs and had enough cars pull in front of me etc etc etc etc. I've got a fairly good understanding of how situations can happen. I know that with riding at any speed one must include various precautions dependant on a multitude of circumstances. I also know that with increased speed the bike & myself carry increased momentum (all the better to cut through fast small animals easier)

& yes, it means slower to come to a stop and that if I was going slower for those wallabies that appear out of nowhere and the wallaby was going a bit faster I would still hit it (with less momentum). These small animals don't really worry me too much any more and old people take longer to get to the middle of the road. (i.e. you run the risk of hitting them if you go too slow).

Well IF you ARE correct in YOUR assumptions I must be BETTER than average. I seem to recall the last time I did a stop watch test I was at 0.12 or 0.14 sec with 0.17 sec worst. Now I guess that nerve signal must go from my hand (start the stopwatch) to my brain and back to my hand (stop stopwatch), so maybe you could halve that for a one way signal.

How does a formula one driver measure his/ her reaction time? The only difference between me and a formula one driver is the rich and supportive parents (they also have facility to go a wee bit faster and haven't seen as many years as I have). ARE YOU one of those driver/ riders that seem to take forever to react to something when I've already seen it, taken evasive action and spent the rest of the time before you react waiting to see what you do?

As for the 50m / 100m thing, I refer you to Scumdogs guide dog comment. I tend to look further ahead the faster I go but, yes as I mentioned above I have hit some wallabies out of nowhere on dark nights, on curves and luckily not put the bike down (I guess the rotational speed of the wheel and the increase gyroscopic effect helped me there). At 70km/hr I hit a wallaby that came out from a bush on the edge of a 4x4 track (I managed to stay upright but it was a heavier hit than others). If I was going faster I would not have hit that one. People must learn that sh*t happens, it doesn't matter what you may or may not be doing. So, this hypothetical object is it moving perpendicular to my trajectory or static? I've already deviated enough from topic and I'm not going to get into a braking debate but I guess track braking markers give an indication of what's possible. Yes, I can brake quite well. Do you have to actually stop, zero km/hr? Stopping is not always the only option. If it's a vehicle coming towards you on the wrong side it doesn't really matter what you do it is likely you're stuffed anyway. That's a good reason to have near horizontal highway verges and no cheese cutters.

Do your calculations take into account the possiblity of evasive routes or the time it would take an object to get from a hidden point into your trajectory (& stop)? Then there's also the matter of, if you're going fast enough you're probably past the object before it gets into your trajectory anyway. Oh oh, what about the variable of seeing a situation changing and adapting your reaction (very quickly). Here's negative one, reacting quickly and making the wrong decision... Maybe we should all just get that cotton wool out?

Travel how you feel comfortable, look well ahead (oh, and also look beside you if you're going slowly. NB - those sideways low speed falls really hurt!), anticipate and try to give yourself a margin of error.

I'll stick with my thoughts of an ideal world where I could do 200 (no, not knee scraping!) if I wanted to without threat of legal action. Back on topic - what is an acceptable speed on a public road? Ever since the politicians made laws saying so it's been 100km/hr on the open roads. Not saying I agree with it but that's what we're stuck with.

Referring to my slow/ sleep comment, yes, I meant people can get into a dazed/ mesmerised states on boring &/or straight roads. I guess in that state their muscles are also more relaxed with less blood in them giving a weaker & maybe less accurate reaction?? Obviously reactions would be terrible in that state.

(On something completely different, what's the go with this "quick reply" editor constantly refreshing and moving from where I'm editing?)

**FJRider** · 15th February 2010, 18:08

Originally Posted by Horney1

-----------------

Travel how you feel comfortable, look well ahead (oh, and also look beside you if you're going slowly. NB - those sideways low speed falls really hurt!), anticipate and try to give yourself a margin of error.

Going by the length of your post ... you have given some thought as to validity of my post.

I also hope there are others that believe their confidence, in their own abilitys ... is VALID.

And I hope a few others get thinking about it too ...

**scumdog** · 15th February 2010, 19:58

Originally Posted by peasea

It's called sarcasm.

Noooooooo..........?

**_Shrek_** · 15th February 2010, 20:29

Originally Posted by onearmedbandit

Sure sure, you just realised it's a public poll more likely.

no i knew, just didn't read it right, but in the mid to late 80's I would have put 50 + over thats how i rode back then, now i sit at 110, 115 & if i need to over take...

I do how ever do up to 200 on the metal, up in the hills but only for short distance's

as you tend to run out of options pretty quick

**peasea** · 15th February 2010, 20:30

Originally Posted by scumdog

Noooooooo..........?

Sounds odd I know, a spot of sarcasm from the TOTS. (That's the Top Of The South, not the little people.)

Are you going to tassle-up and head to the HOG nat's?

**scumdog** · 15th February 2010, 20:33

Originally Posted by _Shrek_

no i knew, just didn't read it right, but in the mid to late 80's I would have put 50 + over thats how i rode back then, now i sit at 110, 115 & if i need to over take...

I do how ever do up to 200 on the metal, up in the hills but only for short distance's

as you tend to run out of options pretty quick

Gotta admit that in early/mid 70's I sat at about 80mph most of the time, never even got stopped.

Mind you, there were only about three cars, a motorbike and a truck in the whole south island back then!

**_Shrek_** · 15th February 2010, 20:39

Originally Posted by scumdog

Gotta admit that in early/mid 70's I sat at about 80mph most of the time, never even got stopped.

Mind you, there were only about three cars, a motorbike and a truck in the whole south island back then!

i never got any tickets back then either, i don't think there were enough

back then to work outside town limits

but have had 4 in the last 5 years,

**TerminalAddict** · 15th February 2010, 20:47

Originally Posted by FJRider

... at 120 km/hr, you will cover around 33 metres Before you actually start the process of reacting to the situation. Be it braking or "mere" avoidence of the problem that has appeared.

I recall skidmark posting he could stop from 200 kph in 2 metres