Speed - what slows you down?

[Big Dog]

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!

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.


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"..... 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.

[bluninja]

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]

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]

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]

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.

Oh. You're one of those retarded cunts.

Arrogant fuckwit. "Keep left unless overtaking" on multi-lane roads.

[MD]

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

[yevjenko]

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]

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]

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]

Being right, is not as important as being alive.

But she's wrong and dangerously so.

[Brett]

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.