Speed limits

Caligastia · January 13, 2003, 12:47

Should they be increased? It depends on where you live, of course, but in general speed limits seem to be too low.

I got a speeding ticket during my trip through NZ, but I don't think my speed was unsafe. The road was long and straight, and the weather was fine. The speed limit was 100 kph (about 62 mph) and I was doing 118 kph (about 73 mph). It seems to me that low speed limits are more of a revenue gathering exercise than anything to do with safety.

Imran Siddiqui · January 13, 2003, 12:49

Quote:

It seems to me that low speed limits are more of a revenue gathering exercise than anything to do with safety.

Yep. The same with tobacco taxes... its for money.

OneFootInTheGrave · January 13, 2003, 13:11

How does Germany fare in the "most deaths on the road per capita"?

Does anyone have any statistics, as far as I know it is the only country in the world where you don't have limits on motorways if the conditions are right (no fog, snow, ice, no major traffic, etc... ) I would like the numbers to be low, as it cuts the travelling time in half.

Jac de Molay · January 13, 2003, 13:13

73 mph is fast? Heck, if you're not doing 80-85 on the interstates here, you're holding up traffic. Speed enforcement in this state is almost non-existent, at least on freeways and highways.

Inverse Icarus · January 13, 2003, 13:21

speed limits on quasi-major roadways on long island are from 40-55, and sidestreets 20-30. i'm always pushing 75 on the way home though

Caligastia · January 13, 2003, 13:21

Quote:

Originally posted by DetroitDave
73 mph is fast? Heck, if you're not doing 80-85 on the interstates here, you're holding up traffic. Speed enforcement in this state is almost non-existent, at least on freeways and highways.

I was going a lot faster before the cop caught me. Lucky for me, otherwise the fine would have been a lot more.

ColdWizard · January 13, 2003, 14:23

Quote:

Originally posted by Caligastia
Should they be increased?

hell no, most people can't drive worth a **** anyway, let alone at high speeds

Kramerman · January 13, 2003, 14:34

On normal streets and such, with intersections and the like, the speed limit is well set for a balance of safety adn convenience, in my opinion. However, I think the speed limit on the freeway and interstates should have no speed limit ( or at least be much higher), and function as they do in Germany.

The vast majority of accidents happen at intersections where cars are changing directions and accelerating, but freeways have no intersections. From driving on the freeway, I would be able to see little difference if all the cars travled 70 mph, or if they all travled 90 mph, as far as safety is concerned, but that extra 30 mph could shave a good few minutes off a commute to work.

By increaseing the speed limit, there would probably be a few more fatal accidents, but the effects of being able to more rapidly move goods to market and stuff like that could have positive effects on the economy, on top of just the higher degree of convenience of being able to get to where you are going quicker.

Kman

rah · January 13, 2003, 14:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Kramerman
By increaseing the speed limit, there would probably be a few more fatal accidents, but the effects of being able to more rapidly move goods to market and stuff like that could have positive effects on the economy, on top of just the higher degree of convenience of being able to get to where you are going quicker.
Kman

Just what we need. 18 Wheelers doing 90 MPH. NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Boris Godunov · January 13, 2003, 14:45

Quote:

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave
How does Germany fare in the "most deaths on the road per capita"?

Does anyone have any statistics, as far as I know it is the only country in the world where you don't have limits on motorways if the conditions are right (no fog, snow, ice, no major traffic, etc... ) I would like the numbers to be low, as it cuts the travelling time in half.

This is only true on the Autobahn, and only on certain parts of it. Around major urban centers, one simply can't go fast, as traffic is rather dense. Plus, one has to get a special license now to drive on the Autobahn, which I believe costs something like $5,000 US (I'm not sure if this applies to everyone or just non-Germans).

At any rate, they have a noticeably lower accident fatality rate than major U.S. highways. However, Germans also treat driving in a different way than Americans, particularly on the Autobahn. There is much more focus and attention paid. Americans tend to view driving as just a means of travel, whereas Germans view it as a past time unto itself.

Germany also has some very strict laws regarding unsafe driving on the Autobahn. Cameras monitor distances between cars, and if you are driving too close to the car in front of you (I think something like 20 feet is the minimum in no traffic, but not sure), then you will be fined severely. Fines are based on the individual wealth of the infractor. A couple years ago they gave out a $10,000 fine to a wealthy driver for tailgating. Ouch.

All of this courtesy of the History Channel, thank you.

chequita guevara · January 13, 2003, 14:47

Actually, there was a markedly noticable drop in highway fatalities when the national speed limit was dropped from 75 to 55 back in the 1970s. It only makes sense, at higher speeds you have less time to react to a dangerous situation. It also saves gasoline.

Anyway, a speed limit of 65 or 75 means that traffic is usually going 75 to 85 miles an hour. If you bump it up, then traffic will still be going faster than the limit, just at much more dangerous speeds.

Caligastia · January 13, 2003, 15:18

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Actually, there was a markedly noticable drop in highway fatalities when the national speed limit was dropped from 75 to 55 back in the 1970s.

Back in the 70s in the US, everyone drove gas guzzling tanks that were difficult to stop. The cars of today handle a lot better.

chequita guevara · January 13, 2003, 15:23

Yes, but people don't handle any better. The problem isn't so much the machine as the person driving the machine. We weren't designed to move at the speed, and we have problems reacting to things that quickly if we aren't specifically trained for it.

At 95 miles per hour, in the time it takes for your eyes to see something, your brain to register it as a threat, and send the impulse to your leg to lift off the gas and hit the brakes, and then for your muscles to actually respond, you've already moved quite some distance.

Given that many people on the highways tailgate, even at high speed, this organic lag time is often fatal.

Traianvs · January 13, 2003, 15:23

Quote:

Plus, one has to get a special license now to drive on the Autobahn, which I believe costs something like $5,000 US (I'm not sure if this applies to everyone or just non-Germans).

That must apply to germans only then

I recently went to Würzburg, Bayern and no special permission of $5000

was necessary... of course the borders are open and we were never checked for any documents

Dauphin · January 13, 2003, 15:26

Rather than speed limits on motorways, minimum distance between you and the car in front (in seconds) should be enforced. Tailgaters and compulsive lane changers are more dangerous than fast drivers who keep their distance.

Caligastia · January 13, 2003, 15:30

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Yes, but people don't handle any better. The problem isn't so much the machine as the person driving the machine. We weren't designed to move at the speed, and we have problems reacting to things that quickly if we aren't specifically trained for it.

At 95 miles per hour, in the time it takes for your eyes to see something, your brain to register it as a threat, and send the impulse to your leg to lift off the gas and hit the brakes, and then for your muscles to actually respond, you've already moved quite some distance.

Given that many people on the highways tailgate, even at high speed, this organic lag time is often fatal.

I agree that the risk of an accident can be higher at higher speeds, but I don't believe higher speed limits will necessarily result in more accidents. There are other factors to consider, such as driver frustration. I was talking with my Dad about this, and he said when he was living in Australia they raised the speed limit and the accident rate dropped.

Arrian · January 13, 2003, 15:38

I agree with the Sagacious one. Actually, add failure to signal and failure to turns lights on in the rain/snow to that list.

More importantly: make the driving test difficult. Make people actually learn how to drive before giving them a license. My driving test was an absolute joke! It was pathetic... I was almost insulted (but mostly happy b/c I knew I was going to get my license and at 16, that's all that matters).

I'm glad they knocked the limit back up to 65mph on many of the highways in CT. I usualy drive between 70 and 80. If the limit is 65, I would have to blow right through a speed trap w/o seeing it at all in order to get a ticket (even a couple seconds of warning would be enough to get down to 74... and they almost always give you 10mph over).

The reality is that the speed limit is designed as a "lowest common denominator" thing. There are a variety of vehicles and drivers on the road. Me, driving my 2002 Honda Accord versus Me, driving my first car (1977 Chevy Impala) are two very different things. The Impala was only good at going straight. Turning or stopping required planning. How about putting a senior citizen whose prime driving days are behind him/her in that '77 Impala. The difference between them and me in my current car with my 26 yr-old reflexes is huge. So I guess I understand the limits, even if I break them

-Arrian

chequita guevara · January 13, 2003, 15:43

I hate lane changers, because I always try to keep a safe distance between me and the car ahead of me, and then some twit jumps into my safe zone, so I have to back off a little more. Soon I'm driving backwards!

Andrew1999 · January 13, 2003, 15:48

Montana tried doing without speed limits for a while after the federal standards were repealed. They made the mistake of counting on the drivers' common sense to determine a "reasonable and proper" speed, and idiots were driving around at over 100 MPH. I think they've got it fixed at 85 now.

Grrr · January 13, 2003, 15:54

Caligastia ... I agree ... our NZ speed limits are just stupid.

And our police spend all their time stopping people on motorways for going 101kmph were it is perfectly safe to go 150 ... and letting murders pass. - It's just plain revenue collection.

Anyway ... our NZ speed limits are insane. 50Kmph in town (which is good IMHO), 70 on the verge of town (also OK) and 100 on motorways and country roads (well motorways could easily be higher ... eg 150, but the country roads around here are often unsafe at 80!).

Saras · January 13, 2003, 16:21

I love these threads

Imran Siddiqui · January 13, 2003, 16:27

All this doesn't change the fact that it is still a way to raise revenue rather than really any safety

.

Dr Strangelove · January 13, 2003, 17:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Kramerman
However, I think the speed limit on the freeway and interstates should have no speed limit ( or at least be much higher), and function as they do in Germany.

The vast majority of accidents happen at intersections where cars are changing directions and accelerating, but freeways have no intersections.

By increaseing the speed limit, there would probably be a few more fatal accidents, but the effects of being able to more rapidly move goods to market and stuff like that could have positive effects on the economy, on top of just the higher degree of convenience of being able to get to where you are going quicker.

Kman

There are a lot of roads in the US that are divided, limited access and 4 laned but really aren't built to the same standards as the interstates because they don't have to be. The problem is that many people don't take notice that the curves are sharper and less well banked, the lanes are narrower, and the acceleration lanes are woefully too short, so they travel at the same speed as the interstate, with tragic consequences.
There is a 4 lane bypass around the east and south sides of town here that fits this description. The builders particularily skimped on the acceleration lanes, some of which are less than 50 feet long. There is one ramp at which thee is an accident at least once a month.

DRoseDARs · January 13, 2003, 17:41

Quote:

Originally posted by rah

Just what we need. 18 Wheelers doing 90 MPH. NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Here in Reno, at least, a lot of freight trucks have grown increasingly aggressive in their driving habits on our highways. They'll tailgate anyone, ride your ass even if you're already doing 75mph (speed limit 65mph all lanes), go below speed limit in the left lane (so-called "fastlane"), cut people off, drive side-by-side, blocking traffic behind them. It's gotten kinda scary with them around. And I've already seen 18 wheelers pushing 85mph...

Boris Godunov · January 13, 2003, 17:45

Another reason one shouldn't compare U.S. interstates to the Autobahn is that the Autobahn was specifically designed and built to accomodate very high speeds, while U.S. highways are not. The asphalt is at least twice as thick on the Autobahn, and curnes are planned so as to be easily manueverable at high speeds.

Having such speeds on U.S. highways would result in more accidents.

Boris Godunov · January 13, 2003, 17:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Trajanus

That must apply to germans only then

I recently went to Würzburg, Bayern and no special permission of $5000

was necessary... of course the borders are open and we were never checked for any documents

You may have been breaking the law and were lucky not to get caught, then. Or perhaps there are sections of the Autobahn where no permit is required. However, I'm fairly certain that some form of permit is required on your car to be displayed in the front window. I think I may have very much overestimated the cost...it may be more like $1500. But still, it's very expensive.

KrazyHorse · January 13, 2003, 17:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

It seems to me that low speed limits are more of a revenue gathering exercise than anything to do with safety.

Yep. The same with tobacco taxes... its for money.

How so? Speed limits are not strictly enforced. If it was about the money, they would be...

DRoseDARs · January 13, 2003, 17:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Frogger

How so? Speed limits are not strictly enforced. If it was about the money, they would be...

Actually, it depends on where you live. Some police departments can be total Nazis about enforcement, like in rural townships where nothing else is happening, while other places are just too big to effectivly enforce the limits. It's all subjective, but speeding tickets CAN BE a good source of revenue. If they did it on bikes, it'd be a good source of exercise too, working off those doughnuts...

Grrr · January 13, 2003, 18:01

Frogger ... you don't live in NZ ... speed limits here are strictly enforced. You get a fine for driving 101kph and a 100 zone.

KrazyHorse · January 13, 2003, 18:08

Really? Cops here basically tolerate 25-30% breakage of speed limit. Sometimes 40% in good weather.