Speed limits

[PLau]

Forum Sponsor

Not really. Ever heard of the hurt report? Just want to add this to the discussion:

"The median pre-crash speed was 29.8 mph, and the median crash speed was 21.5 mph, and the one-in-a-thousand crash speed is approximately 86 mph. Motorcycle riders in these accidents showed significant collision avoidance problems. Most riders would overbrake and skid the rear wheel, and underbrake the front wheel greatly reducing collision avoidance deceleration. The ability to countersteer and swerve was essentially absent."
-Dr Harry Hurt PhD, USDOT Hurt Report

Most accidents happen at low speeds. Therefore, statistically speaking, increasing the speed limit will have a negligible effect.

So how fast do motorcyclists actually crash at with "significant collision avoidance problems"? It sounds like this report is written for cars and most accidents reported on bikes tends to be left turners or running wide on turns.

 

[PLau]

Referring back to my post (as I added a bit to the end). People will always speed here no matter how much it is enforced whether it be a 40 zone or on the highway regardless of the posted speed.

This is FLAWED logic. It's how we're trained. We grow up from as early as kids thinking you can go just slightly over the speed limit. I think most drivers on the road in Canada would say that the speed limits are too low, especially highway speeds. If you set speed limits to what a wide portion of the population would consider "fair", and they were HEAVILY enforced, you'd have A LOT less people speeding. GUARANTEED.

Yeah because doing something stupid at 110 km/h will likely cause less damage than doing something stupid at 130 km/h?

Seems like it

 

[shootingrubber]

So how fast do motorcyclists actually crash at with "significant collision avoidance problems"? It sounds like this report is written for cars and most accidents reported on bikes tends to be left turners or running wide on turns.

Actually, it was written for motorcycles. Statistically speaking, increasing the speed limit will have a negligible effect because the majority of crashes (~99.9 percent of them) happen at lower speeds.

 

[PLau]

Actually, it was written for motorcycles. Statistically speaking, increasing the speed limit will have a negligible effect because the majority of crashes (~99.9 percent of them) happen at lower speeds.

Now all you have to do is convince the government with your points

 

[shootingrubber]

Now all you have to do is convince the government with your points

Unfortunately, they don't like to listen to any sort of logic for change.

 

[GreyGhost]

There is ample research indicating that it is not correct that raising the speed limit raises the average speed by the same amount that the limit is raised. People drive at the speed that they are comfortable at. On motorways (whether Europe, USA, or here), that's normally somewhere near 120 - 130 km/h. If the speed limit is set higher than that, people won't drive faster than what they feel comfortable with.

It's true on the Autobahn: while it is true that there is the occasional high-end vehicle that is really moving along, the reality is that for every one of those, there are at least 10 each of Opel Corsa 1.2, VW Golf non-turbo diesel, Ford Mondeo towing a trailer longer than the car, and the like, and those regular run-of-the-mill cars driven by normal average people are doing 120 - 140 km/h.

It's true in the USA: Several areas out west have raised speed limits to 80 mph (a little over 130 km/h), and the carnage predicted by the safetycrats has not happened. Even Ohio has been looking at raising their 65 mph limit (still higher than us!) to 70, which would be the same as most of the states in the area. If you take I-75 to Florida, Ohio is the only one left that has not changed it to 70 mph. Carnage has not ensued. The long-term decline in motor vehicle fatality rates has continued while the speed limits have gone up.

Reasonable speed limits allow and encourage the police to take their primary focus off speed limit enforcement and onto other things ... like distracted driving, failure to stop at stop signs and traffic signals, and the like. You know ... things that are primary causes of collisions, rather than just contributing factors.

Speed limits are supposed to be set to a speed that 85% of the population will "naturally" drive at or slower than, if they are left to their own devices to set their speed (cover up all the speed limit signs and tell the cops to get lost, then measure what 100 people do under free-flowing traffic conditions in good weather. The speed that the 15th-from-fastest driver is doing, should be the speed limit.)

I would bet that our 400-series speed limits are near the 1-percentile, not the 85th-percentile.

Our secondary roads are probably almost as under-posted. Most of those posted at 80 should be 90 or 100 km/h, and there are some posted at 60 or even 50 that ought to be 90 or 100.

I was looking at some 85th percentile data a few years ago. This is not a comprehensive review, but I worked with what I had. I looked at 12 locations in Aurora, Markham, Vaughan and Richmond Hill with posted speed limits of 60 to 80 km/h. The average 85th percentile speed was 11 km/h over posted (or 16 percent if analyzed that way). One location had an 85th percentile speed 8 percent below posted (65 in a 70), the highest was 44 percent above the posted speed (86 in a 60).

If you look at the actual speeds of each car, there are a few outliers (ie. 1% over 120 in a 60 km/h zone), but the meat is concentrated above the speed limit. I was seeing something less than 10% of cars below posted speed.

 

[油井緋色]

There is ample research indicating that it is not correct that raising the speed limit raises the average speed by the same amount that the limit is raised. People drive at the speed that they are comfortable at. On motorways (whether Europe, USA, or here), that's normally somewhere near 120 - 130 km/h. If the speed limit is set higher than that, people won't drive faster than what they feel comfortable with.

It's true on the Autobahn: while it is true that there is the occasional high-end vehicle that is really moving along, the reality is that for every one of those, there are at least 10 each of Opel Corsa 1.2, VW Golf non-turbo diesel, Ford Mondeo towing a trailer longer than the car, and the like, and those regular run-of-the-mill cars driven by normal average people are doing 120 - 140 km/h.

It's true in the USA: Several areas out west have raised speed limits to 80 mph (a little over 130 km/h), and the carnage predicted by the safetycrats has not happened. Even Ohio has been looking at raising their 65 mph limit (still higher than us!) to 70, which would be the same as most of the states in the area. If you take I-75 to Florida, Ohio is the only one left that has not changed it to 70 mph. Carnage has not ensued. The long-term decline in motor vehicle fatality rates has continued while the speed limits have gone up.

Reasonable speed limits allow and encourage the police to take their primary focus off speed limit enforcement and onto other things ... like distracted driving, failure to stop at stop signs and traffic signals, and the like. You know ... things that are primary causes of collisions, rather than just contributing factors.

Speed limits are supposed to be set to a speed that 85% of the population will "naturally" drive at or slower than, if they are left to their own devices to set their speed (cover up all the speed limit signs and tell the cops to get lost, then measure what 100 people do under free-flowing traffic conditions in good weather. The speed that the 15th-from-fastest driver is doing, should be the speed limit.)

I would bet that our 400-series speed limits are near the 1-percentile, not the 85th-percentile.

Our secondary roads are probably almost as under-posted. Most of those posted at 80 should be 90 or 100 km/h, and there are some posted at 60 or even 50 that ought to be 90 or 100.

Great post. Too bad no one's going to give a flaming ****. There are some pretty obvious areas (highway 7 east of 9th line) that have nothing on either side of the street but are posted 60?!?!?!??!?!!

-_-

 

[sal]

Haha, I second this.

PS. I "heard" somewhere that the 401 was initially designed for 120kmh and was reduced to 100kmh during the gas crisis. Apparently it was left like that for money farming reasons .

+100 Internets to Brian P

 

[nfq]

Haha, I second this.

PS. I "heard" somewhere that the 401 was initially designed for 120kmh and was reduced to 100kmh during the gas crisis. Apparently it was left like that for money farming reasons .

kinda.

Q.

What was the speed limit on Ontario's early highways?

A.

Ontario's first province-wide speed limit on rural highways was introduced in 1903 at 15 mph (24 km/h). The speed limit was increased to 25 mph (40 km/h) by the early 1920s and increased further to 35 mph (56 km/h) by the late 1920s. In 1937, the opening of the new Middle Road superhighway between Toronto and Hamilton prompted another review of the speed limits on Ontario highways. The speed limit on most rural highways was increased to 50 mph (80 km/h) in May 1937. During World War II, the speed limits were temporarily lowered to 40 mph (65 km/h) to conserve Canada's fuel supplies. The next speed limit increase took place in 1959, when the speed limit for passenger cars using the new superhighways such as Highway 400 and Highway 401 was changed to 60 mph (100 km/h). The speed limit for trucks and heavy vehicles on the superhighways was increased to 55 mph (90 km/h) in 1959. On some high standard two-lane highways, the speed limit for passenger cars was increased as high as 60 mph (100 km/h) in 1959. In the late 1960s, the speed limit on the 400-Series Highways was increased again to 70 mph (115 km/h) for passenger cars and 60 mph (100 km/h) for trucks and heavy vehicles. During the energy crisis of the mid-1970s, the speed limit for passenger vehicles was changed back to 60 mph (100 km/h). The energy crisis also brought about the reduction of speed limits on most conventional highways back to a maximum of 55 mph (90 km/h). During the conversion to Metric measurements in 1977, the speed limit on most conventional highways was reduced even further to 80 km/h. Since the 1970s, the speed limit on Ontario freeways has generally remained at 100 km/h (60 mph), while conventional highways have generally remained at 80 km/h (50 mph).

 

[ashkan]

You know, the slow ones in the left lane that no matter how many cars honk at them they will stubbornly stay there and do 90 on a 400 series. Have you ever been ****** off at them enough to you pulled up in front of them and slowly and gradually slowed down to a ridiculous speed like 50 until they were forced to leave the lane and free up all the ****** off cars behind them? cause i sure havnt but i think itd teach them a lesson

 

[Ugur Dinch]

In the late 1960s, the speed limit on the 400-Series Highways was increased again to 70 mph (115 km/h) for passenger cars and 60 mph (100 km/h) for trucks and heavy vehicles. During the energy crisis of the mid-1970s, the speed limit for passenger vehicles was changed back to 60 mph (100 km/h). The energy crisis also brought about the reduction of speed limits on most conventional highways back to a maximum of 55 mph (90 km/h). During the conversion to Metric measurements in 1977, the speed limit on most conventional highways was reduced even further to 80 km/h. Since the 1970s, the speed limit on Ontario freeways has generally remained at 100 km/h (60 mph), while conventional highways have generally remained at 80 km/h (50 mph).

So, am I missing something ? How did crisis effect the speed limits ?

 

[Brian P]

The 401 was originally designed for 75-ish mph with cars of the 1960's, complete with 4 wheel drum brakes, bias ply tires, and no seat belts. ABS brakes and air bags were a figment of someone's imagination at that time, and electronic stability program was not even dreamed of. Don't forget that the original configuration of the 401 had no concrete central barrier and no paved breakdown lanes, and a considerable portion down near Windsor had what eventually proved to be a totally inadequate central reservation between the eastbound and westbound lanes. That area has only seen upgrades to a central concrete barrier in the last few years. Granted, it was not designed with today's traffic volume in mind ... but it was also originally only designed with two eastbound and two westbound lanes for the entire length except through Toronto.

The fuel crisis of the 1970's followed by metric conversion were both excuses to lower the original speed limit.

The UK's national 70 mph speed limit was established because that was approximately the top speed of a Ford Anglia, which was the most popular family car in the UK at the time that the limit was set. If you go back to the early 1960's and spec out a common family car here - not one with a hot-rod V8, but the run-of-the-mill standard engine - it probably wouldn't have gone much faster. A '59 Chevy with a six-banger and Powerglide (or three on the tree) was not a fast car.

 

[Brian P]

So, am I missing something ? How did crisis effect the speed limits ?

Speed limit reductions during the 1973 oil crisis were intended to reduce national fuel consumption.

The US suffered with their 55 mph national speed limit for years afterward, even after the crisis had passed.

 

[nfq]

so why weren't the speeds brought back to 70mph?

 

[daught]

Or most places in the States, interestingly enough.

One time the bf was driving me home up the 404 super late at night (read: no traffic), there was some old geezer in a minivan turtling in the carpool lane doing about 40 km/h slower than everyone else.

My personal pet peeve is people who insist on doing exactly speed limit as they go down a valley (that they then have to floor to get back up to speed going up the other side). Then you get a lovely convoy of red lights behind them because ONE guy doesn't understand physics.

Unfortunately the cops understand physics, and take full advantage of them. They often set up speed traps in valleys.

 

[GreyGhost]

so why weren't the speeds brought back to 70mph?

Further to the previous comments, people naturally drive at a certain speed (say 75mph). Giving out speeding tickets for 5 mph over isn't very profitable.

 

[CafeRay]

=sal;2050714]Haha, I second this.

PS. I "heard" somewhere that the 401 was initially designed for 120kmh and was reduced to 100kmh during the gas crisis. Apparently it was left like that for money farming reasons .[/QUOTE]

I have to laugh at this thread.
There are too many people on the 401, you could never do 120 if they raised it to 150.

Y'all seem to not realize that faster means more gas, more pollution. If you want to go fast, grow a pair and take it to a track.
Otherwise, you end up in an Orange helicoptor like that guy in Burlington saturday. They found his arm in a field.

 

[AL3RT]

Germany folks, Germany...

 

[Schneller]

Germany folks, Germany...

Your point?

 

[SpikedLemon]

GTA drivers can't drive properly at a 100kph limit and you want them to go up to 130?! I guess then we'd have more people off the roads due to accidents...it might just work! Personally I think the limits are low, but considering the average driving skill that is witnessed around the area, I don't think that a higher speed limit is the answer.

You need to visit Woodbridge. Where they regularly drive 100kmh in a 50 zone.
That's not the scary part; they're pretty good at driving fast. It's that they don't stop at red lights or stop signs.

Forum Sponsor