Look at Ontario's highway fatality rate, best in Canada. New York's is almost as good, and in the top three US states. It seems that this "bad" law is having its effect.
|
|
|
Speed limits: Is faster safer?
- Thread starter h0ck3y
- Start date
Look at Ontario's highway fatality rate, best in Canada. New York's is almost as good, and in the top three US states. It seems that this "bad" law is having its effect.
Shaman
Well-known member
You mean the province where everyone drives 20km/h over the posted limit? You figure that it's the "law" that is working?
In any case, if the province raised the speed limits to 110 on the 400 north of Steeles, and the 401 East of Bomanville,
and West of Milton, and set up much more stringent enforcement, would people here be satisfied?
Keep in mind that we're not talking about sideroads, just major routes where the congestion starts to thin out.
A 5 mph difference at 60 mph is much different than a 5 mph difference at 5 mph.
and West of Milton, and set up much more stringent enforcement, would people here be satisfied?
Keep in mind that we're not talking about sideroads, just major routes where the congestion starts to thin out.
A 5 mph difference at 60 mph is much different than a 5 mph difference at 5 mph.
The 401 east of Toronto? Scene of how many multi-vehicle crashes lately?
And another this morning?
Given the CBC story showing that the majority of traffic is speeding on the 401 east of Toronto, too many cars following too close to each other, one has to wonder about the contribution of excess speed not only to the outcome of the crash, but to the crashes having happened in the first place. Higher speed equals exponentially longer braking distances, which is a bad thing on a busy highway with cars following each other too close.
One thing is for sure, the tow trucks and undertakers are doing well by people's impatient driving habits.
AJAX -- Ontario Provincial Police are reporting a crash involving multiple vehicles that had blocked several lanes on eastbound Hwy. 401 in Ajax at Salem Road has been cleared. http://www.durhamregion.com/news-st...ring-cleared-following-multi-vehicle-crashes/
The crash occurred during Thursday evening's commute, around 6:30 p.m.
The stretch of Hwy. 401 between Brock Road in Pickering and Lakeridge Road in Ajax has been a commuter's nightmare in recent weeks due to a number of accidents -- two of which were colossal pile-ups, days apart on a stretch of Hwy. 401 between Ajax and Whitby.
The first was early on the morning of Sept. 23, when several vehicles were involved in a pile-up in the eastbound lanes of the 401 near Salem Road. Two men, one from Oshawa, the other from Mississauga, died as a result.
The second crash happened in the westbound lanes between Salem and Brock roads on the night of Oct. 2. Some 20 vehicles were involved and the roadway was closed for hours as the wreckage was cleared. Four died, and a dozen more were injured.
The crash occurred during Thursday evening's commute, around 6:30 p.m.
The stretch of Hwy. 401 between Brock Road in Pickering and Lakeridge Road in Ajax has been a commuter's nightmare in recent weeks due to a number of accidents -- two of which were colossal pile-ups, days apart on a stretch of Hwy. 401 between Ajax and Whitby.
The first was early on the morning of Sept. 23, when several vehicles were involved in a pile-up in the eastbound lanes of the 401 near Salem Road. Two men, one from Oshawa, the other from Mississauga, died as a result.
The second crash happened in the westbound lanes between Salem and Brock roads on the night of Oct. 2. Some 20 vehicles were involved and the roadway was closed for hours as the wreckage was cleared. Four died, and a dozen more were injured.
And another this morning?
No ID yet for man who died in crash on Hwy. 401 in Pickering Friday
All lanes reopened after fatal accident on eastbound Hwy. 401 in Pickering
http://www.durhamregion.com/news-st...died-in-crash-on-hwy-401-in-pickering-friday/
All lanes reopened after fatal accident on eastbound Hwy. 401 in Pickering
http://www.durhamregion.com/news-st...died-in-crash-on-hwy-401-in-pickering-friday/
Given the CBC story showing that the majority of traffic is speeding on the 401 east of Toronto, too many cars following too close to each other, one has to wonder about the contribution of excess speed not only to the outcome of the crash, but to the crashes having happened in the first place. Higher speed equals exponentially longer braking distances, which is a bad thing on a busy highway with cars following each other too close.
One thing is for sure, the tow trucks and undertakers are doing well by people's impatient driving habits.
Last edited:
conundrum
Well-known member
To paraphrase Jeremy Clarkson...speed doesn't cause accidents, rapid deceleration and impact does. To that end, if you watch drivers in that section of road (say Pickering to Bowmanville), there are cars doing anywhere from as low as 90 to cars doing 150+, again both speeds assuming low traffic. Given the disparity, what do you think happens when those two cars meet? Even close the gap to more realistic/average numbers...someone driving at 130 and someone driving at 100, still is a perfect setup for an accident waiting to happen.
I know I know..you're going to say "it's the speed!"...yes, to a degree, but it is more the difference in speed that is the problem. This is why most major studies have pretty much proven if you increase the limit to around the 85th percentile, suddenly accidents drop off because drivers are paying more attention, and there is less speed disparity on the the road. The same logic can be applied elsewhere -- Say someone was driving in at 10km/h in an 60km/h...what do you think will happen when all the drivers are trying to avoid them?
Personally, I'm a fairly firm believer that if the limits make sense, then most drivers will abide by them. The problem is so many of our major arteries are set to speeds that do not make sense, and where in fact the vast majority are breaking the law every time they are on those roads. Try driving on the 401 at exactly 100km/h...and watch how many cars are going faster than you, and how many near misses occur when people are not expecting a car to be going that slow on the road. Also, note that the 401 (or at least sections of it) used to be 110km/h until the fuel scare/crisis in the 70s. The speed was lowered not to increase safety but to lower fuel usage...yet now the scare is gone, cars are safer and more fuel efficient, yet the lower speed remains.
Last edited:
conundrum
Well-known member
It's working to fund the province and municipalities...that's about it. lol
statsman
Well-known member
There are a number of studies that show that the safest highways are those where everyone is driving the same speed.
All of the vehicles travelling at 100 km/hr equals almost zero collisions.
The problem turns out to be not just those going too fast but also those going too slow.
People speed for a variety of reasons, most of them very poor reasons.
If you are late, speeding up will generally only get you to your destination 1 or 2 minutes sooner.
There is good news and bad news about being late.
The bad news is, if you're already late, no power on Earth can make you on time.
The good news is, technically you're not late until you get there.
All of the vehicles travelling at 100 km/hr equals almost zero collisions.
The problem turns out to be not just those going too fast but also those going too slow.
People speed for a variety of reasons, most of them very poor reasons.
If you are late, speeding up will generally only get you to your destination 1 or 2 minutes sooner.
There is good news and bad news about being late.
The bad news is, if you're already late, no power on Earth can make you on time.
The good news is, technically you're not late until you get there.
Last edited:
Thats why I like the minimum speed signs on Quebec highways.
this argument goes nowhere because of a few things:
1. You can't compare everything to Europe as a massive majority of current drivers here would fail a European driving test (Germany, UK). If we had comparable licensing then you could adapt systems easier.
2. The unofficial speed limit of 120kmh has been here so long without being addressed that it'll take a massive amount of enforcement to make sure that 140 doesn't become the new 120. Sorry but it's the limit at which you feel you might get pinched that dictates many drivers speeds as long as there aren't other considerations like weather etc.
I'll comment to this section of your post....in the commercial vehicle I drive every day in Toronto, I am governed to exactly 105 kph, and I can assure you, I pass more people than you would believe. An interesting little factoid many people are unaware of is that the majority of trucks were governed long before it was law, and despite all the twats that swore up and down that we would be rear-ended daily on the highways, this is just not the case. Anyway, the point I am making is that you can expect slower traffic on any 400 series highways, and they will not be increasing with a higher speed limit.
These limits we have are not only based on an old fuel crisis, but a manageable speed that works with the road construction, weather, and type of traffic, and don't forget the volume of traffic. That has changed exponentially over the years. Ever notice that the worst corridors for brutal and spectacular accidents on the 401 are not in Toronto? They are in exactly the places people want the limits raised, and also happen to be major commerce lanes for large vehicles. The same lanes that the LCV trucks drive in (90kph), fuel B-trains (90kph) and all the provincial trucks (105kph).
At over $2000 (€1400), most of the current drivers in Canada wouldn't even be able to afford a drivers license in Germany.
The logic of some here simply is astounding. They are arguing that raising the limit would be safer due to the 85 percentile theory. BUT then they also argue that the reason for collisions is due to the difference in vehicle speeds. So please explain to me what is going to happen to grandpa or grand ma who "barely" get the car up to 100 when the limit is raised to 120? Do you really think they are suddenly going to become speed demons and drive 120? Likely not they will stay at their current speed 95 - 100 meaning the speed differential will still exist if not slightly increase when people decide they should do 125, (because they don't be seen as "that guy" who is holding things up by doing the limit). So is increasing the limit really "any" safer? As the one poster commented above it is unlikely fleet rigs are going to be increasing the governed speeds due to fuel efficiency.
Instead of focusing almost solely on excess speed as they seem to do now, police should be working cooperatively (i.e. not necessarily punitively) to get slow-pokes to keep with the flow of traffic. If that means putting the lights on behind a slower car (to get them to move over, for example) and/or pulling them over for a talking-to, so be it.
People going 20kph slower than the flow of traffic are as bad as people going 20kph faster than the flow. Safety is best served by addressing both sides of that coin.
Perhaps a re-wording of some legislation would help here too.
Kri$han
Well-known member
Agreed!! Except that the guy going 20km/h faster than the flow of traffic is probably paying more attention than everyone going at the flow and under
(you KNOW it's true!).I think a minimum speed of 90 and maximum speed of 120 should be set on all 400-series highways. Included in this new legislation should be the understanding that police will enforce the speed limit more strictly (unwritten rule will be >+10km/h = ticket).
I think in PQ the lower limit if 60 km/h though; which probably accounts for poor weather conditions, but at 60km/h it hardly seems relevant...
So if "everyone" is going 120 and the legal limit is 100, then the recommended course of action is for the police to pull over and chastise the person who is doing the legal limit. What exactly is the officer to say during this "taking to" Listen you are NOT to drive the legal limit, you are expected to speed... Yep great concept.
Kri$han
Well-known member
Guys. The rule is 20%!! not 20 km/h.
Don't got faster than 72 on Eglinton and you will a) have enough time to react to situations on the road, b) be following the flow of traffic really well and c) avoid a ticket
My commute is 60 min at the limit, 40 min at 150, 30 min at a comfortable 200, or 20 min if a see a popo. Far from 1 or 2 min.
Aside from the fact that we -- yes, even cops -- all know that the "legal limit" is an arbitrary value set by bureaucrats instead of traffic engineers, the issue remains that drivers going substantially slower than the flow of traffic are a hazard and an obstruction to the natural flow of traffic. They force other drivers following the flow to perform unnecessary lane changes, contribute to "concertina" braking etc.
Is your solution to up cop budgets and cruiser counts to ticket all of the the 85% of drivers going normal/flow speeds? Why can't gentle persuasion to get slower drivers to pick it up also be considered?
Fixed, low-ball speed limits are an anachronism. Some people loaf along at the "legal limit" because their ****-scared of getting a ticket by a fat pig having a bad day. Pulling people over who are a hazard and a hindrance to the flow of traffic and letting them know that it would be in everybody's best interest if they went with the flow and kept right except to pass...why is this so bad? Of course, cops would have to stop issuing tickets for idiotic reasons to lessen people's fear levels but we all know it's not in their interest to change, don't we hedo ... ?
No I was merely pointing out the flaw in your "solution". An officer has NO authority to pull over a driver who is doing the legally posted limit. It isn't up to the officer, you or I to tell them they have to "drive with the flow" as long as they are doing the legal limit, there is NOTHING that can be done. Just because they may be holding someone up who is speeding is not their concern. More often than not it is NOT fear of a ticket, (if they are doing the limit or within 5 km under they have no fear, of a ticket it is "usually" an elderly/new or nervous driver.
Just because you feel the limit is not acceptable doesn't permit the one who is actually following the law to be scolded. Then we will have people "bitching" the cops pulled me over FOR DOING THE SPEED LIMIT!!!! LOL
Until, or when the limit is changed there is nothing that can be done to the driver. Actually the OPP do not do speed enforcement, (radar/lidar on the 401 inside of the Toronto area, (more so in the Express Lanes. Simply because it is too dangerous to stop vehicles on the narrow shoulders. If your doing WELL in excess of the limit they generally will stay on your tail, wait till you get onto a ramp then make the traffic stop.
It is of course all the cops fault after all it was them who set the limits and wrote the legislation..lol Nice try but take your anger to the ONLY ones who can do anything about it Queen's park, (after the MTO, who are in NO hurry to deal with this issue), have recommended an increase.
Just because you feel the limit is not acceptable doesn't permit the one who is actually following the law to be scolded. Then we will have people "bitching" the cops pulled me over FOR DOING THE SPEED LIMIT!!!! LOL
Until, or when the limit is changed there is nothing that can be done to the driver. Actually the OPP do not do speed enforcement, (radar/lidar on the 401 inside of the Toronto area, (more so in the Express Lanes. Simply because it is too dangerous to stop vehicles on the narrow shoulders. If your doing WELL in excess of the limit they generally will stay on your tail, wait till you get onto a ramp then make the traffic stop.
It is of course all the cops fault after all it was them who set the limits and wrote the legislation..lol Nice try but take your anger to the ONLY ones who can do anything about it Queen's park, (after the MTO, who are in NO hurry to deal with this issue), have recommended an increase.
|
|
|
|
|