Increased hwy speed limit

[SunnY S]

Forum Sponsor

sorry, I don't agree its about selfishness and "me too"

studies show that people drive at speeds they are "comfortable" with, thats why most ppl drive at 120. for me, Im happy cruising at 170 and am confident of my capabilities. Please don't confuse a safe higher rate of speed, with reckless speeding (cutting ppl off, tailgating, aggressive driving, flashing lights). I see no danger in a responsible speeder who takes advantage of open areas, signals properly, keeps proper spacing to fellow motorists, isn't zig zagging like a maniac, etc.

the problem is, we have artificially low speed limits on many, not all, of our main roads. I get the city streets and school zones, but on country roads, highways, and expressway, service type roads, and main open areas, speed limits are way too low.

 

[danp]

The median speed will go up if the speed limit is raised. People that do 130-140 now will be doing 150-160 if the limit is changed to 120.

The data doesn't support that. Studies in US states where speed limits were increased show that actually the opposite happens, fewer people speed when the limit is increased.

Here's some quotes by the department of transportation in Utah where they increased the limit to 80 mph: 80 mph Speed Limit Doesn't Lead to More Crashes in Utah

 

[sburns]

Its about time. 100 kph is among the slowest in the world. That speed limit was introduced in the 60s when cars have 4 wheel drum brakes.
100 kph on one of the most modern highways in the world, the 407, is a complete joke.
Advanced studies have shown the speed limit should be set at what 80% of the drivers already drive at.
The 400 series of highways should be 120 and IMO the 407 should be 130 or 140.

Would our base drivers be as equally as skilled as other places?
Do they have they same weather conditions... snow! Just what we need more pile ups because some num numbs think they can do 120 k and stop like they do in summer, or just has no idea how to drive in snow.
Is our infrastructure comparable. It's obvious ours in the GTA was designed in the 60's when they all were high on something. It's terrible and is probably a cause for a lot of our congestion. Europe has much better roads and design to them.

As mentioned in a similar thread there is no point to increasing the limit as Ontario has a selfish driving problem, speeders and aggression, and a dumb dumb problem, lane hoggers and slow speeds. Both of these should be addressed before speeding things up. But there is no enforcement.

I could potientally see then increasing the limit outside of the GTA as this makes some sense.

 

[Wingboy]

sorry, I don't agree its about selfishness and "me too"

studies show that people drive at speeds they are "comfortable" with, thats why most ppl drive at 120. for me, Im happy cruising at 170 and am confident of my capabilities. Please don't confuse a safe higher rate of speed, with reckless speeding (cutting ppl off, tailgating, aggressive driving, flashing lights). I see no danger in a responsible speeder who takes advantage of open areas, signals properly, keeps proper spacing to fellow motorists, isn't zig zagging like a maniac, etc.

the problem is, we have artificially low speed limits on many, not all, of our main roads. I get the city streets and school zones, but on country roads, highways, and expressway, service type roads, and main open areas, speed limits are way too low.

What? You don't agree about me too and selfishness,but you drive 170! Self entitlement at it's finest.The majority of the population can't handle drivers like you.The have the same priviledge and responsibility that you do.You may have better driving skills than the average driver on our poorly designed highway system,but that doesn't mean you get a different set of rules and laws.

 

[Supernam]

sorry, I don't agree its about selfishness and "me too"

studies show that people drive at speeds they are "comfortable" with, thats why most ppl drive at 120. for me, Im happy cruising at 170 and am confident of my capabilities. Please don't confuse a safe higher rate of speed, with reckless speeding (cutting ppl off, tailgating, aggressive driving, flashing lights). I see no danger in a responsible speeder who takes advantage of open areas, signals properly, keeps proper spacing to fellow motorists, isn't zig zagging like a maniac, etc.

the problem is, we have artificially low speed limits on many, not all, of our main roads. I get the city streets and school zones, but on country roads, highways, and expressway, service type roads, and main open areas, speed limits are way too low.

How can you possibly drive at 170 and not zig zag through traffic? Are there no cars on the 400 series during those times?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SunnY S]

What? You don't agree about me too and selfishness,

Nope, I agree that speed limits are artificially low.

Cars are far more safer and capable then they were 5, 10, 20 years ago and they keep getting safer and more capable.

I'm not saying everyone should do 170, but for those that are comfortable and capable (full faculities, not under any influence), and have the appropriate and safe machinery. sure.

 

[SunnY S]

How can you possibly drive at 170 and not zig zag through traffic? Are there no cars on the 400 series during those times?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ever drive down the 401 to Windsor? Especially at night? I've done it in record time in pre-racing law days. I did get pinched in Chatham-Kent once upon a time coming back from an Indianapolis 500 return trip clocked at 178 or so, he dropped it down to 149 where the fine was greatly reduced, nice cop.


same with driving to Montreal, theres some truly nice open stretches with little traffic. used to make the Montreal Grand Prix F1 race in record time too year after year


montreal to Quebec city, another nice stretch light on traffic



Not saying that ppl should speed at every opportunity, just theres a time and place and I enjoyed it for many years.

 

[sburns]

sorry, I don't agree its about selfishness and "me too"

Stop right there, you are saying all these morons drivers who are updated their headlights with these glaringly bright lights like high beams are doing it just to see better at night.

 

[sburns]

Nope, I agree that speed limits are artificially low.

Cars are far more safer and capable then they were 5, 10, 20 years ago and they keep getting safer and more capable.

I'm not saying everyone should do 170, but for those that are comfortable and capable (full faculities, not under any influence), and have the appropriate and safe machinery. sure.

Cars might be capable but the person is not always. And we are dealing with the lowest common denominator here. People who can't even speed up on the merge ramp to match the highways speeds before entering traffic. This is the same person who will cut into your lane doing 90, just because the lane is free, and you are doing 170 and they will just sit there.
You want something like the autobaun.

 

[SunnY S]

Cars might be capable but the person is not always.

very true,

but we ride motorcycles and deal with these same ppl. I'm more scared on a bike in the city, than I was cruising on the highway.



Anyways, this thread brought back some great driving memories, no need to worry anymore, The street racing laws along with my advancing age put the kibosh on these joys, I drive slow now.

 

[Evoex]

People who can't even speed up on the merge ramp to match the highways speeds before entering traffic. This is the same person who will cut into your lane doing 90, just because the lane is free, and you are doing 170 and they will just sit there.

Amen.

 

[Brian P]

Re questionable drivers: Just because the speed limit is raised doesn't mean you have to drive faster. You can drive the same as you always did, it will just be legal now. And that's typically what happens (others have quoted studies already). Even on unrestricted sections of the autobahn, general traffic flow is 120 - 140 km/h ... little different from here. (The number of high-end cars going much faster is vastly outnumbered by the VW Polo non-turbo diesels, Renault Twingo, vans with 4 cylinder diesel engines, cars towing trailers which by the way limits them to 100 km/h and right lane only)

The "stunt driving" threshold is another matter ... It isn't a hard number, it's X km/h above the posted speed limit regardless of where that is. Be careful what you ask for, you may just get it. If the 401 speed limit is increased to 120 and the X is reduced from 50 to 30 to keep the total stunt-driving threshold at 150 on the 401 then it's going to be 30 above on all those under-posted 60 km/h rural roads as well, and *that* I would have a problem with ... unless they raised the two-lane limit to 100 on not just provincial highways (hardly any of those remain!, remember, a previous government offloaded those to municipalities years ago) but also on regional roads (tough to do, affects thousands of local speed limits that were set by municipalities). Just leave the threshold at 50 over ... The cops will still be able to bust those doing 200 plus ...

 

[Brian P]

Should add that in my van, I would still keep it at 105 - 110 in the right lane, as I do now (gets thirstier really fast above that), and in my car, I would still do 120 as I do now, because that's where it's happy. 120 on the speedo is really only about 115.

 

[nobbie48]

5 minutes? Was that sarcasm?

Apples to oranges with traffic variables. Regardless, the diminishing return still goes against higher speeds.

 

[nobbie48]

Re questionable drivers: Just because the speed limit is raised doesn't mean you have to drive faster. You can drive the same as you always did, it will just be legal now. And that's typically what happens (others have quoted studies already). Even on unrestricted sections of the autobahn, general traffic flow is 120 - 140 km/h ... little different from here. (The number of high-end cars going much faster is vastly outnumbered by the VW

Collisions are less damaging when all vehicles are travelling at the same speed. Make all drivers go fast instead of slow? Most drivers have poor skills and bad attitudes. Left lane hogs, secret agent signallers, tunnel vision etc. Try getting re-elected if a politician goes the retraining route when the hoi poloi sees the problems "Someone else".

 

[bitzz]

"Re questionable drivers:..."

When the topic of highway speeds comes up everyone wants to compare to the autobahn.

No one wants to talk about how hard it is to get and keep a German drivers license.

 

[Blackfin]

I hate everything being determined by the lowest common denominator. In this case, ****** drivers.

Increase the f***ing limit and have cops put as much emphasis on the distracted, the slow, the obstructionists, those that don't signal, those that tailgate etc as they currently do on those going a few kph over some arbitrary limit.

It's like police act like there's only one law on the books. If they did their jobs and worked on all aspects of driving -- and not just speed -- there would probably be fewer ****** drivers on the road; people would either smarten up or their insurance premiums would relegate them to buses and trains.

 

[HarleyHare]

No, it's not necessary, and in case you don't know that the GTA has the 6th worst traffic congestion in the world, and in summer the 400 is crawling on weekends.

 

[Mad Mike]

...TBH, if they raised the limit for the 400-series to 120 but left the "racing" speed and its penalties in place for 150+ I'd be okay with that too.

SHHHHH! Don't give them any ideas

There is a diminishing return on speed increases. A buddy living in Niagara Falls relates his drive to Port Credit for family visits doing the limit and the white knuckle ride when an in-law had a heart attack. The white knuckle ride saved him five minutes.

Increasing speed saves a lot more time than the difference between 100 and 120KMH over distance. When you increase speed on a roadway, the capacity of the roadway increases at the same rate as speed. This means you the onset of congestion is extended by quite a large factor, which is the greater time saver.

I don't think safety is a major factor. 40 years ago speed limits were as high as 75 mph in Canada - they reduced speeds to save fuel during the 70's energy crisis, it was not done to increase safety. If 60s' era cars could handle the speed, I think modern cars can do same..

 

[BB722]

No, it's not necessary, and in case you don't know that the GTA has the 6th worst traffic congestion in the world, and in summer the 400 is crawling on weekends.

So the GTA speaks for the rest of this massive province?

SHHHHH! Don't give them any ideas
Increasing speed saves a lot more time than the difference between 100 and 120KMH over distance. When you increase speed on a roadway, the capacity of the roadway increases at the same rate as speed. This means you the onset of congestion is extended by quite a large factor, which is the greater time saver.

I don't think safety is a major factor. 40 years ago speed limits were as high as 75 mph in Canada - they reduced speeds to save fuel during the 70's energy crisis, it was not done to increase safety. If 60s' era cars could handle the speed, I think modern cars can do same..

One thing to consider is there's a lot more congestion now than there was 40 years ago. Outside of the GTA this isn't the case though.

Forum Sponsor