Open Road Speed Limits? Time for a change?
- Thread starter MarkB
- Start date
Driver education is STILL minimal, I think we should have mandatory re-education at set intervals ( 5 years ? ) AND more advanced driver training.
Road condition is a factor but on those roads that are designed for higher speeds why not allow drivers to drive at that speed. Just got to make sure the cars we import are adequate for those speeds.
Cheers
Graeme
Were you driving in the 70s and 80s? Law enforcement was nowhere near the level it is today, with radar / laser guns, cameras, fully equipped patrol cars out there all the time etc etc etc
As to your first paragraph, it makes no sense to me. The figures are a death rate per 100,000 people so population is irrelevant. They have much better roads due to the shorter distances they have to travel and far more predictable wildlife with fenced autobahns etc etc. I would fully expect Germany's road toll to be far better than ours but it isn't - I wonder why?
no i wasn't. but i know it was quite common to knock down a couple at a pub and then drive back home. so if you are going to be telling me that better (questionably) enforcement of speed limits is responsible for safer roads than i'm going to call you a liar. because if it was, we wouldn't have so many people getting speeding fine after speeding fine. the way i see it, people still drive as they used to, they just pay for it more
Note though that the limit is 70mph (about 110km/h) whilst the de-facto speed is about 80 (130) and the police really don't worry - tailgating and dangerous overtaking and cutting are the real dangers on motorways, not speed per se. And even if there were speed cameras, they're generally triggered at 10% + 2 so 79 in a 70 limit. Given our camera 2/3 tolerance, when I bought my car cruise control was a must have.
What surprised me, coming from the UK, is that I drive the Melbourne-Seymour stretch of the Hume regularly and see next to no speeding: 110 is the limit and it's very rare to be overtaken by someone doing much more than this whilst in the UK 70 limit = drive at 80 unless you've got a BMW when it's 90.
Nice. Of course the enforcement of speed limits isn't the only factor (who ever said it is? that's a straw man argument if ever I saw one) but it is clearly one of the factors. Nothing is ever so black and white out in the real world. We need to work on all the factors if we want to continue to make progress on the road toll, which I definitely support.
I'd like to add that a lot of the road toll count doesn't really belong there. A bloke dying of a heart attack and crashing as happened 2 weeks ago - he would have died sitting at home watching the Sullivans. that idiot 4 weeks ago in thornlie that smashed into the car head on and injured the teenage girl (not sure if there was a fatality)... that moronic behaviour is a world away from sneaky radars on major highways that are hopelessly under their engineered speed limit (thinking of the graham farmer here, 80kms, s/be 130kms) and associated revenue raising.
I find it strange that people flash lights to let others know there is a radar ahead. EOD someone has to pay the tax to pay for all the white camrys to keep the auto workers jobs in SA. If everyone was warned of the radar there would be no revenue, meaning you would get taxed more elsewhere or they would lower speed limits until they made more. only last week some road safety council wanted fines increased... best gift the govt had received in a long time. So expect speeding fines to go up now. Oh yes... the criminality of doing 82kms on a dry sunny day in an 80 zone that was designed to be 110! Here you go sir, $300 penalty, but no demerits because lets face it this is about the bucks more than anything wink
wink "but, but..." "sir! if it only saves one life it will all be worth it. See grandma Jessop, she just passed you by, slowly and surely wins the race. just be more grannie like and we'll all be happy. now you don't have anywhere to be do you? no one in Australia works very hard and if you do go on strike. hoo roo"
I find it strange that people flash lights to let others know there is a radar ahead. EOD someone has to pay the tax to pay for all the white camrys to keep the auto workers jobs in SA. If everyone was warned of the radar there would be no revenue, meaning you would get taxed more elsewhere or they would lower speed limits until they made more. only last week some road safety council wanted fines increased... best gift the govt had received in a long time. So expect speeding fines to go up now. Oh yes... the criminality of doing 82kms on a dry sunny day in an 80 zone that was designed to be 110! Here you go sir, $300 penalty, but no demerits because lets face it this is about the bucks more than anything wink
wink "but, but..." "sir! if it only saves one life it will all be worth it. See grandma Jessop, she just passed you by, slowly and surely wins the race. just be more grannie like and we'll all be happy. now you don't have anywhere to be do you? no one in Australia works very hard and if you do go on strike. hoo roo"I'm all for increasing the limit on stretches of road where it is safe to do so. Inattention and fatigue are more common causes of accidents on country roads, not solely speed.
However it's hard to fine someone for inattention, and state governments are hooked on speed camera revenue, so speed becomes the big bogey of road use. And the constant brain washing by Transport Departments over the last 20 years has worked.
The biggest factor on lowering the road toll in Australia was the mandatory wearing of seatbelts. Making cars safer, and roads safer is the way to go.
Improving country roads will lower the road toll, more so that fining someone for going 6kmh over the speed limit. But fixing roads costs money, and fining people raises money.
So guess which route governments take? And they do so by brain washing us that they are fining us 'to save lives'.
So we are fined for going over the limit in the city, even though 75% of road deaths in SA occur on country roads. The hypocrisy is staggering.
However it's hard to fine someone for inattention, and state governments are hooked on speed camera revenue, so speed becomes the big bogey of road use. And the constant brain washing by Transport Departments over the last 20 years has worked.
The biggest factor on lowering the road toll in Australia was the mandatory wearing of seatbelts. Making cars safer, and roads safer is the way to go.
Improving country roads will lower the road toll, more so that fining someone for going 6kmh over the speed limit. But fixing roads costs money, and fining people raises money.
So guess which route governments take? And they do so by brain washing us that they are fining us 'to save lives'.
So we are fined for going over the limit in the city, even though 75% of road deaths in SA occur on country roads. The hypocrisy is staggering.
It depends on each section of road. Wen a new road is designed every straight section and every corner has a specific design speed which is the speed it is safe to travel that section of the road at. For obvious reasons, the RMS/VicRoads/MainRoads etc sets the legal speed limit less than the design speed limit as people do and will speed. E.g. a corner may have a speed limit of 75kph although has a design speed limit of 95kph.
The M4 and similar safety rated roads in Sydney would easily handle 130kph for most of it. For roads where there are frequent corners, a higher speed limit is not practical. Most of Australia's roads are in poor form already compared to overseas roads that do have higher speed limits.
I don't see how people think driving faster is safer though.
The M4 and similar safety rated roads in Sydney would easily handle 130kph for most of it. For roads where there are frequent corners, a higher speed limit is not practical. Most of Australia's roads are in poor form already compared to overseas roads that do have higher speed limits.
I don't see how people think driving faster is safer though.
Speed limits are lower in urban areas. Lower energy impact crashes tend to injure people more often than kill them.
As noted, there is the fatigue element.
That aside, I'm sure most people agree that driving faster is more dangerous than not (the laws of physics still apply).
But risk is (largely) unavoidable..
And how much risk is too much? (Or, dare we ask, not enough?)
And are we any less safe at (say) 130 or 140 km/h today than we would have been at 100 or 110 km/h 30 or 40 years ago?
This post was brilliant imo.
It's not all about safety. If it was then we would, as Ausprop says, all driving around at 5 km/h.
It's about acceptable levels of risk....
The ground (technology / driver training / road conditions) has shifted, our speed limits have not.
My point was that we are constantly told that speed kills. If that's the case, then we should take some of the city speed cameras and put them on country roads. (Where the vast majority of deaths occur.)
But this would cut revenue (in this state).
Its just been raised to 80 Mph after assessments of road surfaces and car technology (well that is if there are no road works or traffic jams)
but as someone who learnt to drive in the UK, and drives there every year or so, I concur that the behavior and courtesy is SO much better there.
I think Germans are the most prolific drinkers on Earth - not far ahead of us?
I wonder what % of their deaths were autobahn low-level flying, as opposed to drunk driving related death.
I was.
There are way more drivers on the road now than then. I remember when the Monash Freeway started at Toorak rd, and ended at the turn off to Punt rd.
Now, I can go from my house to Sydney on freeway almost the whole way.
Stud rd in Roweville was a single lane highway in the middle of nowhere, and now it is suburbia central, and the road is 3 and 4 lanes wide in both directions.
And so on.
From my memory, the suburban and city roads were the same standard as now, basically. The freeway system was nowhere near as advanced, but there were less cars of course.
I remember the Vic Country roads were way better than the NSW roads - a definite drop in standard once you crossed the border.
The road offense program was pretty good - there were "speed tapes" on various roads, with the cops hidden up the road a bit to pull you over. They worked on the S=D/T formula. The tapes were almost invisible on the road until it was too late.
There was aerial surveillance with the white lines on the roads so they could time you between two points from the air, same formula. But everyone became aware of the white lines.
There was the radar gun, and the introduction of the red light camera. The red light camera was a huge success for stopping red light runners. Everyone was scared to death of them.
They also policed the no seat belts problem in a big way for a time due to unconstrained folk getting killed and injured.
And, of course; the booze bus came about.
But, back in the '70's and '80's the drink/drive focus was not as intense, so I reckon there was a lot more of it than now. Certainly a lot more undetected than now..
Nowadays the visible presence of the cop car is way less than back then it seems, so folks don't have the visual deterrent that cop cars have on speeding.
One thing that bugs me is when some nutter doing 150+k in a 100k zone wraps themselves around a tree and the immediate reaction is to lower the speed limit to 80k.
It ain't the speed limit that caused it folks!
I do think we should get a deduction on rego, CTP and insurance(some do now) if we complete a driver training course.
It ain't the speed limit that caused it folks!
I do think we should get a deduction on rego, CTP and insurance(some do now) if we complete a driver training course.
Yep, amphometers they were called, but they didn't work if you had more than two axles.
40% higher? That's acceptable?
The articles are not saying that speed is a major cause of accidents, although it can be one factor. What that are saying is that at a higher speed, the chance of death resulting is much higher.
There are many factors in accidents. The fatality rate has been reduced drastically in Australia since its peak in 1970. Since then, speed limits on highways have been imposed (Victoria before 1970 didn't have an upper limit- 70mph was introduced in 1971, 60mph in 1973). Seat belts became compulsory. RBT was introduced. Cars and roads are better. People have been educated- or at least aware- of road safety issues.
Speed is a factor in road deaths- but it's not the only factor.
Sounds terrific in theory.
We are constantly asked by folk to get the cheapest tyres, but ones which will last a million kilometres, stick like shoit to a blanket, stop on a 5cent piece and are as quiet as a mouse
This after inspecting their tyres and seeing wire sticking out the sides or worse, often times.
You would not believe how often someone comes in to enquire about replacing their tyres for the first time on their 3 year old machine. Haven't much of an idea about what the tyres cost at this point.
Often times they are Michelins, or Bridgestone Potenzas etc...top dollar Original Equipment tyres.
Mind you; I don't want to sell the *******s either, because there is no margin in them for me. Anything brandname is *******ised to death. The only person who wins is Mr. Bridgestone and Mr. Michelin.
Their usual response is to die of shock at the price, then we have to look for the cheaper alternative because they don't want to spend the money.
This also happens with yer Beemer, Saab, Audi, Volksy and Merc owners by the way.
And don't start me on trailer owners...trailers are usually about 50 years old, more rust han steel, left out in the elements with perished tyres and used twice a year and they want to spend 5cents on the tyres because "it's only a tailer"....."have you got any retreads or second hand tyres?"
And then want you to race out after the tailer tyre hand grenades on the side of the Freeway and sort them out because their tyres are 40 year old.
Last edited: