Thread: 130km/h speed limits

Originally Posted by Mick_Marsh

So, what you are telling me is, don't believe the evidence someone put up to support their argument? Do you have any evidence to support this?
At least it wasn't sourced from Whirlpool.

Ah, I thought that was from a separate article, sounded like a newspaper excerpt.

But Universities will do the same, how else would they get funded

It even says that the results were indistinguishable between fast and slow, that screams 'doctored' to me. I can't prove it, and obviously any difference in velocity of objects will result in a crash upon impact. But on a good road (Like the Hume), with a good driver (the type who should actually have a licence), there should be no issues.

Originally Posted by Eevo

Petition for 130kmh limits - On the road - Automotive - Whirlpool Forums

Well, that sums it up then.

The premise to raise speed limits (to 130) is only there as a 'puff' for motoring journalists, and to stir up some stupid petition.

If you think about a trip on any road suitable for a speed limit increase, and ONLY increase the speed, what difference will it make? Bugger all, because you will still have morons refusing to keep left, morons treating like a racetrack, and morons making three lane changes in one go because they've just realised their exit has arrived.

I'd also suggest an increase will support more fixed speed, and mobile speed cameras, because the catch up speed required for Police enforcement will be that much higher (and riskier). 130 might as well be 140-145 because not many Police will bother chasing a <10 or <20 Exceed Speed Limit offence when the catch-up is going to be 220+ and bigger fish are usually on their way.

We don't have a culture of a professional (or safe) attitude to driving because we allow our children to be taught to drive by parents who were taught to drive by their parents - some exceptions, but not many - and when they do get a licence it becomes a right, not a privilege.

After a holiday drive we all have anecdotes of the lunacy we've seen, but spend some time with the poor bugger who does that for a living (Heavy Vehicles) and imagine contending with that.... The lunatics get to go another 20kph, and the speed restricted vehicles (professional drivers) get a front row seat.

A raised speed limit alone will sell a few magazines and do very little to reduce travel times, at the expense of many other factors.

Matt.

Originally Posted by MR LR jnr.

They did it on the Hume, which is a pretty bloody good road. Obviously it couldn't be applied everywhere.

I hate to say this,,, but the "Hume" is NOT a "good" road. Well at least not from Melb to Albury anyway. There are several sections within this where this road is positively dangerous at 110, let alone how it would be at 130.

Originally Posted by Chops

I hate to say this,,, but the "Hume" is NOT a "good" road. Well at least not from Melb to Albury anyway. There are several sections within this where this road is positively dangerous at 110, let alone how it would be at 130.

The new part of it is good, I've driven on it at 130, in a Navara, and they have some pretty ****ty dynamics... No problems.

Originally Posted by Chops

I hate to say this,,, but the "Hume" is NOT a "good" road. Well at least not from Melb to Albury anyway. There are several sections within this where this road is positively dangerous at 110, let alone how it would be at 130.

You often hear fatalities on the Hume reported on the radio.
There is one section, I think it was around Longwood, where my little car used to bounce all over the place. The concrete posts for the bridge rails were rather close to the road there too.

Originally Posted by MR LR jnr.

The new part of it is good, I've driven on it at 130, in a Navara, and they have some pretty ****ty dynamics... No problems.

That proves nothing except that you were lucky. People have survived a parachute failure after jumping out of a plane; using your logic, that makes jumping out of planes sans 'chute safe.

Originally Posted by V8Ian

That proves nothing except that you were lucky. People have survived a parachute failure after jumping out of a plane; using your logic, that makes jumping out of planes sans 'chute safe.

Well the car wasn't jumping all over the place, or doing anything out of the ordinary, it felt exactly the same as at 110. So using your logic, everyone doing 110 is also just 'lucky'. Had it been bouncing or swaying then obviously. Seems like you're really stretching to prove that the engineers that designed the road were wrong... Have you driven it Ian?