Opinion: Speed is not the root of all evil

[PrincessBandit]

Haven't read the link in the OP (a full glass of Roaring Meg Pinot Noir has compromised my reading skills) but the "speed is not the root of all evil" is obvious. Speed on the race track is obviously an appropriate place for it to be displayed. The public highways and byways are another matter.

On the race track the participants either have the skill to be there or at the very least understand the consequences of their presence there.

On the road Joe Public ain't gonna be interested in the Rossi wannabees.

I'm sure lots of riders and drivers would consider themselves perfectly "safe road users" at speeds in excess of the official limit. Additionally, under ideal road conditions, speeds over 100kph are often quite 'safe'. However, how many people overestimate their ability to handle their vehicle appropriately at higher speeds when the unexpected happens?

tits. that took me ages to type with all the correctiosn thanks to lovely Roaring Meg.

p.s. aint heading anywhere on el bandito in the next 36 hours so you're all quite safe from me.

[swbarnett]

Hmmmm so adding a bit of adrenaline to 'fix' the loss of focus?

I'm not talking about adrenaline. That's a whole nother level. What I mean is the difference between speeds where drivers/riders are lulled in to a false sence of security and slightly higher speeds where they know at a deeper level that they better pay attention or things will go pear-shaped. At the lower speed you get more distracted drivers.

[Berries]

Like this quote from the introduction, which seems to go to the heart of the matter;

Road users are more likely to comply with a speed limit if it is consistent with limits on other roads in the network with similar characteristics, and if limits in general reflect the factors that most influence speed choice

One of the basic speed limit principles, but one that has been watered down by the introduction of non warranted speed limits to appease complainants, amongst other things.

I guess one of my gripes is who decided that 100km/h is the cut off point for safety? At some point soon we are going to see more 80 and 90km/h speed limits on rural roads, where 79.9999km/h is deemed 'safe', yet 83.0km/h, or whatever the margin of error is on Police equipment, is unsafe. And yet the number of vehicles that crashed in that 83 to 100km/h range will be so small as to be hard to measure.

[Edbear]

I'm not making excuses for anyone. There are many factors they take into account and that's one of them. What the reasons were for setting those limits on those roads I have no idea. Point being it's a lot more complicated than we all think it is.

Funny that, it would appear that those that set the speed limit do a lot of study and research and take into account a lot of very different factors. Most unlike KB, I believe...

All good mate but once again it all comes back to $s,theres not enough coppers to do the actual police work as its is,take a portion away for road duties things get worse.That said my old lady works at the 111 call center and if anyone complains of not enough coppers around her the replys always the same ie theres plenty but they spend most of there time dealing with complete and utter bullshit rather than being able to get on with more serious issues.To quote her "anyone that wants to hear the true state of this country needs to spend a thursday/friday/saturday evening at a 111 call center.Off topic some sorry Bob,enjoyed reading your post as well.

All whocriticise others should "walk the mile..." so to speak. Spend a day in ICU and Triage, another day with the cops out there doing it, and another in the 111 call centre. Might change a few opinions..?

Haven't read the link in the OP (a full glass of Roaring Meg Pinot Noir has compromised my reading skills) but the "speed is not the root of all evil" is obvious. Speed on the race track is obviously an appropriate place for it to be displayed. The public highways and byways are another matter.

On the race track the participants either have the skill to be there or at the very least understand the consequences of their presence there.

On the road Joe Public ain't gonna be interested in the Rossi wannabees.

I'm sure lots of riders and drivers would consider themselves perfectly "safe road users" at speeds in excess of the official limit. Additionally, under ideal road conditions, speeds over 100kph are often quite 'safe'. However, how many people overestimate their ability to handle their vehicle appropriately at higher speeds when the unexpected happens?

tits. that took me ages to type with all the correctiosn thanks to lovely Roaring Meg.

p.s. aint heading anywhere on el bandito in the next 36 hours so you're all quite safe from me.

Quite right m'dear... Well done!

One of the basic speed limit principles, but one that has been watered down by the introduction of non warranted speed limits to appease complainants, amongst other things.

I guess one of my gripes is who decided that 100km/h is the cut off point for safety? At some point soon we are going to see more 80 and 90km/h speed limits on rural roads, where 79.9999km/h is deemed 'safe', yet 83.0km/h, or whatever the margin of error is on Police equipment, is unsafe. And yet the number of vehicles that crashed in that 83 to 100km/h range will be so small as to be hard to measure.

It's nothing to do with any speed over being "unsafe", it's simply the fact that that is the law and if you break the law, you can expect punishment...

[swbarnett]

It's nothing to do with any speed over being "unsafe"

You've got it in a nutshell. I don't believe a speed limit has anything to do with safety*. The problem is that whereever you set it there'll be those who think it too low and those that think it too high. That's why I'm in favour of doing away with them all together. That way cops can punish behaviour that is actually dangerous - including excessive speed for the conditions.

, it's simply the fact that that is the law and if you break the law, you can expect punishment...

While I agree that we can't complain for being ticketed when we know the limit and exceed it, just because it's law does not make it right. And the way to change bad laws is for the populace to ignore them.


*Which does not necessarily mean I believe it's all about revenue either. Those that set the limits may actually believe we are safer because of them.

[Daffyd]

You've got it in a nutshell. I don't believe a speed limit has anything to do with safety*. The problem is that whereever you set it there'll be those who think it too low and those that think it too high. That's why I'm in favour of doing away with them all together. That way cops can punish behaviour that is actually dangerous - including excessive speed for the conditions.




*Which does not necessarily mean I believe it's all about revenue either. Those that set the limits may actually believe we are safer because of them.

I used to hold this view, but have begun to question it. It means that we would be at the mercy of a cop's personal opinion, (perceived,). If he didn't like bikers he might consider 80km/h too fast for the conditions...if he liked bikers, he might consider 120-130 km/h perfectly ok.

[Edbear]

I used to hold this view, but have begun to question it. It means that we would be at the mercy of a cop's personal opinion, (perceived,). If he didn't like bikers he might consider 80km/h too fast for the conditions...if he liked bikers, he might consider 120-130 km/h perfectly ok.

Agreed, once you start relying on individual perceptions, well, you only have to read KB to see the problems that would cause...

[Mental Trousers]

I'm not making excuses for anyone. There are many factors they take into account and that's one of them. What the reasons were for setting those limits on those roads I have no idea. Point being it's a lot more complicated than we all think it is.

Funny that, it would appear that those that set the speed limit do a lot of study and research and take into account a lot of very different factors. Most unlike KB, I believe...

Apparently none of those studies have anything to do with the size or weight of the vehicles that will be using the road in question.

KB is the home of the instant expert who is always right and doesn't require facts to back them up. Where would we be with KB??

[swbarnett]

I used to hold this view, but have begun to question it. It means that we would be at the mercy of a cop's personal opinion, (perceived,). If he didn't like bikers he might consider 80km/h too fast for the conditions...if he liked bikers, he might consider 120-130 km/h perfectly ok.

You will always get people like that. Even now some will let you off when others will go out of their way to do you. You would, of course, have recourse through the courts.

I remember the days of the traffic safety service. The head of which didn't consider speed a big deal. Driver angst was down and, as I'm led to believe, so was the accident rate. He was sacked in the end, as it's rumored, because he was doing too good a job of improving safety and the ticket take was too low.

[FJRider]

Agreed, once you start relying on individual perceptions, well, you only have to read KB to see the problems that would cause...

MY individual perception is dependant entirely on the drugs I've been using at the time ...

[Edbear]

MY individual perception is dependant entirely on the drugs I've been using at the time ...

And whether the Missus is in the car with you...

[FJRider]

And whether the Missus is in the car with you...

In some circumstances .... my personal choices are questioned ...

Silently ... of course ...

[Metastable]

My question is:

Do speed limits really make a difference on the average speed? To me it seems like people will drive at the speed they are comfortable with. I've seen roads where people barley even get near the limit. I have seen roads where the majority of traffic is moving about 30kph over the limit, because the limit is ridiculous.

I believe MOST road users will travel at a speed they think is safe. Sure, there maybe a few that say... HEY I can go THAT fast, so I will.... but wouldn't otherwise, but I think that is a small minority. I think speed limits should be set depending on the ~80% average road user speed.

There are a ton of studies out there showing cases where increased limits actually decreased accidents, because most people wanted to go a touch faster, but you'd get the odd stickler that would abide by the exact limit, therefore causing impatient overtakers and accidents as a result. Other studies have shown that stretches where people fall asleep, increasing the speed limit has helped (Texas I-10 West of San Antonio).... it is a boring stretch of road.

There have been studies in the UK also suggesting lower limits and or cameras increasing accidents.

IMO - as mentioned earlier, giving more room between the opposing traffic would be a huge help. Even if a fully divided road is too cost prohibitive, then making the roads a bit wider with a 2 meter "no-mans-land" in the middle denoted by painted lines, would probably help. Of course that takes money too.... but at least it would still allow for overtaking as opposed to having a barrier... then you'd have to add an extra lane to each side or multiple overtaking zones.

[Berries]

Apparently none of those studies have anything to do with the size or weight of the vehicles that will be using the road in question.

KB is the home of the instant expert who is always right and doesn't require facts to back them up. Where would we be with KB??

Don't know if that is aimed at me or not, but I'd be interested to see a road where the speed limit was set due to the size and weight of the vehicles using it. Must be a north island thing.

Seriously, have a look at the link in post 20. This tells you exactly how speed limits are worked out, and if you download Appendix II you can have a go yourself. There's no magic to it.

My question is:

Do speed limits really make a difference on the average speed?

I read some research this week that said if you drop the speed limit the mean speed drops by around one quarter, i.e. drop the speed limit by 10km/h and you get a 2.5km/h reduction in mean speeds. So they make some difference, but will have to rely on enforcement to get better compliance if there is no change in the environment.

[swbarnett]

Even if a fully divided road is too cost prohibitive, then making the roads a bit wider with a 2 meter "no-mans-land" in the middle denoted by painted lines, would probably help.

Surely you mean "motorcycle passing lane"?

They've started doing that here. I can't remember where but somewhere not too far south of Auckland I came across it.