Wheels Magazine's Quest to Raise Speed Limits
Discussion
Wheels Magazine recently drove at 130kph and put forward some arguments why this makes sense for Australia.
Naturally this has been rejected by anyone claiming to be an 'authority' on the matter.
http://www.caradvice.com.au/252046/car-magazine-dr...
For my two bits I find the speed limits here draconian and ridiculous. Everywhere in the 1st world people drive faster. In the uk in particular and although the national speed limit is 112kph, try and find someone doing this speed on any motorway. The average is around 130...
Freeways in USA are even faster!
Anyhow, Australia seems stuck in the 1800's ---Speeding bad, your head will explode if you exceed 130kph!!
Naturally this has been rejected by anyone claiming to be an 'authority' on the matter.
http://www.caradvice.com.au/252046/car-magazine-dr...
For my two bits I find the speed limits here draconian and ridiculous. Everywhere in the 1st world people drive faster. In the uk in particular and although the national speed limit is 112kph, try and find someone doing this speed on any motorway. The average is around 130...
Freeways in USA are even faster!
Anyhow, Australia seems stuck in the 1800's ---Speeding bad, your head will explode if you exceed 130kph!!
It is a massively simplistic view of driving in Australia to say we should just raise speed limits.
130KMH is not particularly quick at all but it is fast enough considering the lack of driver education and little requirement to maintain your car to any sort of standards. That people cannot drive on an arrow straight, wonderfully smooth and wide freeway at 100KMH without somehow running in to the car in front or running off the side of the road or driving themselves in to a situation where they need to panic brake suggest that they cannot be trusted at 130KMH.
We would need a complete overhaul of driver education and vehicle roadworthy standards Aus wide. I do not trust the government to NOT implement something more draconian and the cost to overhaul and implement new systems would be massive.
It is cheaper and easier for the public to be kept scared and compliant...in fact the government can win votes and turn a profit from it without having to lift a finger!
130KMH is not particularly quick at all but it is fast enough considering the lack of driver education and little requirement to maintain your car to any sort of standards. That people cannot drive on an arrow straight, wonderfully smooth and wide freeway at 100KMH without somehow running in to the car in front or running off the side of the road or driving themselves in to a situation where they need to panic brake suggest that they cannot be trusted at 130KMH.
We would need a complete overhaul of driver education and vehicle roadworthy standards Aus wide. I do not trust the government to NOT implement something more draconian and the cost to overhaul and implement new systems would be massive.
It is cheaper and easier for the public to be kept scared and compliant...in fact the government can win votes and turn a profit from it without having to lift a finger!
papahet said:
people cannot drive on an arrow straight, wonderfully smooth and wide freeway at 100KMH without somehow running in to the car in front or running off the side of the road or driving themselves in to a situation where they need to panic brake suggest that they cannot be trusted at 130KMH.
This.Until the driving is at a better standard "we" should not be trusted to go faster.
The other day, the wife saw a Rav4 on it's roof. It was at traffic lights in a 60 zone.
If you can do that at 60, I hate to think what they could do at twice the speed.
It really is a joke isn't it.
In the 60s, with no driver training required at all, I used to average over 70 MPH Sydney Melbourne/Brisbane, in a late 50s yank tank Chrysler Royal, with my Brabham in an enclosed trailer on the back, on roads that today would draw complaint as a country back road. Many others did the same, & I can't remember a single prang.
Many used to average something approaching 80 MPH in the same sort of cars without the trailer, on a regular basis.
I remember a trip from Young NSW to Sydney in 1953 my father arranged for me with a commercial traveler returning home in his heavily loaded 53 Chev. I remarked of him cruising at 75 MPH on the gravel roads of the day, as our 36 Dodge could not go that fast.
We probably concentrated more in those days, which helped. However if people of today, with modern cars on our modern roads can't cruise at the same speeds, it is time to apply the Darwin principle, & let them eliminate themselves.
In the 60s, with no driver training required at all, I used to average over 70 MPH Sydney Melbourne/Brisbane, in a late 50s yank tank Chrysler Royal, with my Brabham in an enclosed trailer on the back, on roads that today would draw complaint as a country back road. Many others did the same, & I can't remember a single prang.
Many used to average something approaching 80 MPH in the same sort of cars without the trailer, on a regular basis.
I remember a trip from Young NSW to Sydney in 1953 my father arranged for me with a commercial traveler returning home in his heavily loaded 53 Chev. I remarked of him cruising at 75 MPH on the gravel roads of the day, as our 36 Dodge could not go that fast.
We probably concentrated more in those days, which helped. However if people of today, with modern cars on our modern roads can't cruise at the same speeds, it is time to apply the Darwin principle, & let them eliminate themselves.
Chicken and egg....improvements won't be made with no reason ... road deaths relatively stable ...
Raising the limit endangers not only the idiots (good population control) but unfortunately everyone else as well...
I generaly agree in a slight hike in reasonable places for the speed limit. I have no idea how tough the driving test is compared to the UK. The general higher number of people on the road in the UK probably has something to do with it.
I don't buy the whole "people concentrated more in the 1970s" stuff. Less cars on the road, slower cars, less police on the road...I would expect a LOT more drink driving....we've come a long way in many areas of driving...I understand the test is not one of them.
Raising the limit endangers not only the idiots (good population control) but unfortunately everyone else as well...
I generaly agree in a slight hike in reasonable places for the speed limit. I have no idea how tough the driving test is compared to the UK. The general higher number of people on the road in the UK probably has something to do with it.
I don't buy the whole "people concentrated more in the 1970s" stuff. Less cars on the road, slower cars, less police on the road...I would expect a LOT more drink driving....we've come a long way in many areas of driving...I understand the test is not one of them.
Yes Tas less cars on the road, but when you were driving 1930s to 1950s cars on corrugated gravel roads, one did concentrate harder than today. I am talking about the average driver, not the enthusiast. I'm not talking about 1970s either, but the 50s & 60s. Hell by the 70s, even country councils had discovered bitumen.
Back then if you did many miles, you drove on the wrong side of the road, as it minimized the effect of the corrugations. Not only were you looking for the big pothole or bump that could throw you off the road, but were looking for a dust cloud ahead that indicated an oncoming car, requiring you to return to the correct side of the road.
Perhaps no radio, tape or CD player, & no mobile phone also allowed better concentration.
My earliest driving was in a 1930 dodge converted to a ute from a sedan. If you think you don't concentrate much harder in a moderately heavily loaded thing, with a beam front axle, & cart springs, on a corrugated gravel road, than you do in a modern thing on bitumen, I know you haven't done it.
papahet said:
We would need a complete overhaul of driver education and vehicle roadworthy standards Aus wide. I do not trust the government to NOT implement something more draconian and the cost to overhaul and implement new systems would be massive.
I disagree, cars on Australian roads are pretty much the same standard as UK, Germany and certainly better than the USA! There's bugger all driver training or education in these countries as well. However europe does seem have a load more common sense with road use (USA has none).All in all I think a raise from 110 to 130kph would be achievable without a massive increase in deaths.
Funny enough I read a German democratic report linking higher speeds with greater fuel consumption and hence greater reliance on 'foreign oil'. Strange but true.
Bibbs said:
This.
Until the driving is at a better standard "we" should not be trusted to go faster.
The other day, the wife saw a Rav4 on it's roof. It was at traffic lights in a 60 zone.
If you can do that at 60, I hate to think what they could do at twice the speed.
I agree I would be a little worried about everyone being able to drive at these higher speeds. People can't even stick to the inside lane for peets sake, stubbornly sitting on the outside come hell or hiogh water (and what annoys me more is seeing the police doing the exact same thing here!).Until the driving is at a better standard "we" should not be trusted to go faster.
The other day, the wife saw a Rav4 on it's roof. It was at traffic lights in a 60 zone.
If you can do that at 60, I hate to think what they could do at twice the speed.
This would be TOTALLY impractical but maybe you could take an advanced driving test and display something on your car to allow you to drive at a higher speed. Again, can't see this working for the life of me, but raising the speed to 130 with these numpties on the road AND cars that have never had an inspection in their life worries me more.
ajg31 said:
People can't even stick to the inside lane for peets sake, stubbornly sitting on the outside come hell or hiogh water (and what annoys me more is seeing the police doing the exact same thing here!).
It's not illegal.There are no laws about undertaking, keeping left etc. (well not in WA) I find this actually keeps the traffic slower as you'll have three cars abreast all doing the same speed.
Hasbeen said:
Yes Tas less cars on the road, but when you were driving 1930s to 1950s cars on corrugated gravel roads, one did concentrate harder than today. I am talking about the average driver, not the enthusiast. I'm not talking about 1970s either, but the 50s & 60s. Hell by the 70s, even country councils had discovered bitumen.
Back then if you did many miles, you drove on the wrong side of the road, as it minimized the effect of the corrugations. Not only were you looking for the big pothole or bump that could throw you off the road, but were looking for a dust cloud ahead that indicated an oncoming car, requiring you to return to the correct side of the road.
Perhaps no radio, tape or CD player, & no mobile phone also allowed better concentration.
My earliest driving was in a 1930 dodge converted to a ute from a sedan. If you think you don't concentrate much harder in a moderately heavily loaded thing, with a beam front axle, & cart springs, on a corrugated gravel road, than you do in a modern thing on bitumen, I know you haven't done it.
I would counter that there were less people and therefore idiots on the road, now there are literally millions of idiots on the road...so though road conditions may have improved the number of obstacles that will potentially kill you has increased. The number of times I have had to avoid or see far enough ahead to recognise trouble brewing is incredible. If the road is empty and I am having a spirited drive, I don't really have a problem, I drive tot eh conditions, if they are bad I slow down.Back then if you did many miles, you drove on the wrong side of the road, as it minimized the effect of the corrugations. Not only were you looking for the big pothole or bump that could throw you off the road, but were looking for a dust cloud ahead that indicated an oncoming car, requiring you to return to the correct side of the road.
Perhaps no radio, tape or CD player, & no mobile phone also allowed better concentration.
My earliest driving was in a 1930 dodge converted to a ute from a sedan. If you think you don't concentrate much harder in a moderately heavily loaded thing, with a beam front axle, & cart springs, on a corrugated gravel road, than you do in a modern thing on bitumen, I know you haven't done it.
I would also ask how fast your 1930s ute conversion was going....and how fast all the other road users were travelling....not that fast.
The answer is that if everyone concentrated then there would be far less accidents but according to stories told by the generation above me, there tended to be a lot more crazy stuff going on that you simply could not get away with now due to sheer numbers of people and capabilities of cars. It seems the teaching has not improved inline with teh capabilities of modern cars.
You prove your own point, you might be the best driver in Australia...its everyone else I am worried about and there are a lot more of everybody elses now than there were....so yes, as one petrol head to another regardless of generation, I think one has to concentrate more now than 50-60-70 years ago. Driver traininghas to be better than it was 60 years ago...sadly it appears its not.
The road toll per capita has massively decreased since the 70s, mainly due to seatbelts and drink driving.
I get really pissed off about this debate. It is quite clearly about certain stretches of road, such as the Hume Highway, Federal Highway, Pacific Highway etc etc that have been upgraded to excellent roads. They could safely have their speed limit increased to 130. 3 days a week I do the stretch of the F3 freeway between Gosford and Newcastle. Around 6pm. It could safely be 130, even at that time.
It's not about increasing every road to 130. You will still have idiots doing 100 in 60 zones. It just targets key roads that higher speeds can be safely achieved.
I get really pissed off about this debate. It is quite clearly about certain stretches of road, such as the Hume Highway, Federal Highway, Pacific Highway etc etc that have been upgraded to excellent roads. They could safely have their speed limit increased to 130. 3 days a week I do the stretch of the F3 freeway between Gosford and Newcastle. Around 6pm. It could safely be 130, even at that time.
It's not about increasing every road to 130. You will still have idiots doing 100 in 60 zones. It just targets key roads that higher speeds can be safely achieved.
When they throw out their 'fatalities this year' toll that generally gets thrown around at holiday periods the first thing a policeman or road safety 'expert' does is tell everyone to 'watch their speed' and 'dont speed'. Its absolutely mental that all accidents seem to be solely attributed to speed.
People predominantly crash as they simply dont pay attention - whether its merging, overtaking or using the appropriate speed. Its not speed that is the issue it is as follows:
Speed x Lack of Attention / Appropriate driving to the conditions = fatalities. Your speed could be off the charts but if you're paying attention and driving appropriately then the answer could well be Nil fatalities. So so so simple but this bloody minded and short sighted approach is actually costing lives as they figure there is only one way to hammer this nut.
I drove along the freeway yesterday in the inside line. about 10 car lengths ahead in the outside lane of a 3 lane freeway was a Driving Instructor just merrily driving along at 100km/h with no body on the inside lanes. Didnt once change lane. Insane lack of awareness and road usage rules and this from the person charged with teaching the next generation of drivers.
People predominantly crash as they simply dont pay attention - whether its merging, overtaking or using the appropriate speed. Its not speed that is the issue it is as follows:
Speed x Lack of Attention / Appropriate driving to the conditions = fatalities. Your speed could be off the charts but if you're paying attention and driving appropriately then the answer could well be Nil fatalities. So so so simple but this bloody minded and short sighted approach is actually costing lives as they figure there is only one way to hammer this nut.
I drove along the freeway yesterday in the inside line. about 10 car lengths ahead in the outside lane of a 3 lane freeway was a Driving Instructor just merrily driving along at 100km/h with no body on the inside lanes. Didnt once change lane. Insane lack of awareness and road usage rules and this from the person charged with teaching the next generation of drivers.
Bibbs said:
ajg31 said:
People can't even stick to the inside lane for peets sake, stubbornly sitting on the outside come hell or hiogh water (and what annoys me more is seeing the police doing the exact same thing here!).
It's not illegal.There are no laws about undertaking, keeping left etc. (well not in WA) I find this actually keeps the traffic slower as you'll have three cars abreast all doing the same speed.
Road Traffic Code 2000
Division 2 — Keeping to the left
112. Keeping as far left as practicable
(1) Except where these regulations provide otherwise, a driver shall keep the vehicle as close as practicable to the left boundary of the carriageway, except where 2 or more lanes marked on the carriageway are available exclusively for vehicles travelling in the same direction.
Points: 2 Modified penalty: 1 PU
(2) Subregulation (1) does not apply if the vehicle is a motor cycle.
[Regulation 112 amended in Gazette 22 Dec 2006 p. 5820.]
113. Restriction on use of right lane
(1) In this regulation —
marked lane does not include —
(a) a lane set aside exclusively for vehicles making a left or right turn; or
(b) a special purpose lane; or
(c) any other lane that is not for the use of general traffic on the carriageway; or
(d) a slow vehicle turn out lane;
right lane, in relation to 2 or more marked lanes that are available exclusively for vehicles travelling in the same direction, means the marked lane that is further or furthest to the right side of the carriageway;
(3) A driver shall not drive the vehicle in the right lane unless —
(a) the driver is turning right, or making a U turn from the centre of the road, and is giving a right turn signal; or
(b) the driver is overtaking; or
(c) a “left lane must turn left” sign or left traffic arrows apply to any other lane, and the driver is not turning left; or
(d) the driver is required to drive in the right lane under regulation 137; or
(e) the driver is avoiding an obstruction; or
(f) the traffic in each other lane travelling in the same direction is congested; or
(g) there are only 2 marked lanes and the left lane is a slow vehicle turn out lane.
Points: 2 Modified penalty: 1 PU
TWO OR MORE LANES
If the speed limit that applies to a road is 90km/h or higher or there are 'KEEP LEFT UNLESS
OVERTAKING' signs installed, you are not permitted to drive in the right lanes of these roads
unless:
• You are turning right or making a 'U' turn and
giving a right turn signal;
• You are overtaking another vehicle;
• The adjacent left lane is a special purpose lane
such as a bus lane or bicycle lane;
• The left lane is a left turning lane and you are
travelling straight ahead; or
• The other lanes are congested with traffic.
papahet said:
It is a massively simplistic view of driving in Australia to say we should just raise speed limits.
130KMH is not particularly quick at all but it is fast enough considering the lack of driver education and little requirement to maintain your car to any sort of standards. That people cannot drive on an arrow straight, wonderfully smooth and wide freeway at 100KMH without somehow running in to the car in front or running off the side of the road or driving themselves in to a situation where they need to panic brake suggest that they cannot be trusted at 130KMH.
We would need a complete overhaul of driver education and vehicle roadworthy standards Aus wide. I do not trust the government to NOT implement something more draconian and the cost to overhaul and implement new systems would be massive.
It is cheaper and easier for the public to be kept scared and compliant...in fact the government can win votes and turn a profit from it without having to lift a finger!
^^ This is basically thread and campaign, closed.130KMH is not particularly quick at all but it is fast enough considering the lack of driver education and little requirement to maintain your car to any sort of standards. That people cannot drive on an arrow straight, wonderfully smooth and wide freeway at 100KMH without somehow running in to the car in front or running off the side of the road or driving themselves in to a situation where they need to panic brake suggest that they cannot be trusted at 130KMH.
We would need a complete overhaul of driver education and vehicle roadworthy standards Aus wide. I do not trust the government to NOT implement something more draconian and the cost to overhaul and implement new systems would be massive.
It is cheaper and easier for the public to be kept scared and compliant...in fact the government can win votes and turn a profit from it without having to lift a finger!
Banging the speed limits up without a seismic shift in driver attitudes, edcuation and road conditions, would be a disaster.
If wheels want to do something useful, they should be campaigning for for better drivers education and much better road surfaces.
Wet weather grip (in Perth at least) is nothing short of downright cartoonish.
At least while all the lemmings are peering fearfully over there steering wheel at 99kmh in the belief that over 100kmh lies certain death, they're a known quantity for us normal people to overtake or go around.
I just got back from the UK. From Heathrow I rented a car, got on the M3 south, banged it straight up to 150kmh in lane 3 and there I stayed in absolute bliss all the way to my front door more or less, in Bournemouth. The feeling of liberation was immense.
Colonial said:
Good luck ever seeing it enforced.
Exactly, even the police violate this so why wouldn't the public. In SA I see quite a few keep left signs on roads lower than 90k's but nobody takes a blind bit of notice.Weirdnevil said:
Where are they going wrong with Driver education?
In WA (only state I've had a glance of the regs for), you need 40 hours of logged time with an experienced driver, pass a theory and a driving test, and then you get 2 years of probation with all manner of odd restrictions on vehicles and usage. You can get a Private Pilots Licence with less logged time.
I don't think they are really doing anything wrong for the new generation of drivers but obviously something was a bit off before.In WA (only state I've had a glance of the regs for), you need 40 hours of logged time with an experienced driver, pass a theory and a driving test, and then you get 2 years of probation with all manner of odd restrictions on vehicles and usage. You can get a Private Pilots Licence with less logged time.
Having said that, the actual test is a bit of a sham. Fair enough, in SA you do 75 logged hours and then have to either take a VORT (which is like taking a test in the UK) or take a driving test with an instructor. As far as I am aware from asking people who have chosen the instructor stage (as it is so much easier) you just have to get the ticks in the boxes. If you stuff up anything you don't fail, you just do it again another day and everything you did right you don't have to do again.
Edited by ajg31 on Friday 20th September 00:17
Edited by ajg31 on Friday 20th September 00:18
I've never been to India,but have been to Australia,but from what I've seen on the tv about indian driving I reckon Australians can't be far behind when it comes to bad driving.
It's quite simply horrendous,they have no spacial awareness or road sense ,half the time I don't actully think they realise they are driving,they think that they are in that funny expensive box that takes them where they want to go with a few simple manually inputted instructions,but don't worry ,as long as they don't go as fast as that funny numbered sign on the side of the road,everything will be tickety boo.
The police and driving authorities down under should be ashamed of themselves.
Or maybe not,as they do make a fortune from fines,apparently.
It's quite simply horrendous,they have no spacial awareness or road sense ,half the time I don't actully think they realise they are driving,they think that they are in that funny expensive box that takes them where they want to go with a few simple manually inputted instructions,but don't worry ,as long as they don't go as fast as that funny numbered sign on the side of the road,everything will be tickety boo.
The police and driving authorities down under should be ashamed of themselves.
Or maybe not,as they do make a fortune from fines,apparently.
WeirdNeville said:
Where are they going wrong with Driver education?
Take a simplistic view of it - how many driving school cars do you see? Not many. So what happens is many just get taught from their parents and the bad habits keep on.Also, I would think that the 40 hour log book is very loosely adhered to.
In addition how many L platers do you see in mixed traffic. They just potter round empty suburbs in off peak times and so when they get out in the real world they have no concept of other traffic, good speed, awareness etc.
No one is being taught to merge well, drive to the road conditions, keep left etc.
Also, they all learn in Auto's which is very nice when you're old and lazy like us but when young manual teaches better car control, greater concentration and forethought processing.
Yes the process seems to be well thought and regulated (like many Australian rules) but the reality is very different.
WeirdNeville said:
Pommygranite said:
Take a simplistic view of it - how many driving school cars do you see? Not many. So what happens is many just get taught from their parents and the bad habits keep on.
Also, I would think that the 40 hour log book is very loosely adhered to.
Ahhh, the "She'll be right" School of driver tuition.Also, I would think that the 40 hour log book is very loosely adhered to.
I'm genuinely interested BTW, not trying to stir a hornets nest. The closest I've come to Aussie driving tuition so far is a trip to the DMV to get my licence. I saw lots of people taking clicky screen theory tests.
I know the RAC do good work and have good facilities too - but i suppose that's all corporate/optional.
If they're serious about reducing road deaths then driver education is the place to start, with a rigorous independent testing system. Like much in Australia, it's designed not only around the lowest common denominator, but also so as not to unduly penalise regional communities. There are people out there 1000km away from a testing center, so why should THEY have to have proper driving lessons or pit their car over the pits yearly?
They could enforce driving course attendance for speeding offences, that's a way of getting experienced but inattentive drivers back in the classroom. Resistance to learning is huge though, and I bet people would resent a couple of days enforced driving tuition more than they currently resent a $200 fine.
With regards to the remote communities its a shame the view is somewhat lax - ever hear of crashes involving 7 people in a commodore including 3 or 4 unrestrained kids...
On a side note even structuring the Points system. Here you start with 12 and then get demerits as if you have some form of allowance to lose so dont worry about. Perhaps you should start the other way as an accumulation building to a loss of license if perhaps a clearing loss of privilege.
Also, there are no auto 12 month bans for DD - I think its 6 months which is pitiful.
I would respect it if they restricted all under 21 year olds to Front Wheel Drive cars under 2.0lts and 80kw. Probably save a few kids each year. The roads here are greasy beyond belief and not built for inexperienced RWD drivers...
Gassing Station | Australia | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff