Topic: Does Speed Really Kill?

[sailor723]

The other thing people forget is that cars (steering,brakes,suspension etc)  have improved dramatically in the last 50 years but most speed limits have remained the same.

[johngenx]

The other thing people forget is that cars (steering,brakes,suspension etc)  have improved dramatically in the last 50 years but most speed limits have remained the same. been lowered

FFA - We've had many speed limits lowered here.  Highway 2 through St. Albert was once 80, now 60, and a haven for photo radar.  Lots of examples here of that stupidity.

[Black Hatch]

Speed doesn't kill..... it's the impact.

[dkaz]

Hwy 1 and 99 south of the Fraser River used to be 70 mph, then the metric system came around and it got lowered to 100 km/h.

[Black Hatch]

The other thing people forget is that cars (steering,brakes,suspension etc)  have improved dramatically in the last 50 years but most speed limits have remained the same. been lowered

FFA - We've had many speed limits lowered here.  Highway 2 through St. Albert was once 80, now 60, and a haven for photo radar.  Lots of examples here of that stupidity.

Thats what happens when commerical areas pop-up.
When Hwy 2 NB to 23 Ave about 20 years ago, the speed limit was 110kph... now its reduced to 70 to 90kph because of all the comercial development around ie South edmonton common.

oh yeah photo radar there too.... (where I got a ticket)

[blotter]

^^^

this is why every multi lane highway should have maximum and minimum limits. (i've only seen this in NB)

I once got stuck on hwy 406 in rush hour.  Started with cruise on at 105km/h
the average driver does about 115km/h but some go 125 to 130
I ended up behind someone driving 70km/h  ------ in heavy traffic it took a while to find a moment to be able to pull in the left at 75 without someone flying at me at 130.   I seen a fee people do this and nearly get rear ended but it creates a massive chain reaction.   

[blur911]

^^^

this is why every multi lane highway should have maximum and minimum limits. (i've only seen this in NB)

I once got stuck on hwy 406 in rush hour.  Started with cruise on at 105km/h
the average driver does about 115km/h but some go 125 to 130
I ended up behind someone driving 70km/h  ------ in heavy traffic it took a while to find a moment to be able to pull in the left at 75 without someone flying at me at 130.   I seen a fee people do this and nearly get rear ended but it creates a massive chain reaction.   

Quebec also has a minimum, the guy going 70km/h would be fine as the minimum is 60km/h.   Again, way off from what's actually dangerous, which is probably around 90km/h when you start being  a hazard.

[dkaz]

Then you have the hill up the Snow Shed on the Coquihalla Hwy, speed limit 110km/h, semis crawling up the right lane at 20km/h, regular cars on the middle lane going 80km/h, then drivers on the left lane with capable vehicles screaming up at 110-150.

Except for the Snow Shed, I aim for a minimum of 10km/h below the speed limit when going up hills on multi lane highways.

[aquadorhj]

only when i get the murderous feeling when stuck behind a slow poke in the left lane.   

[X-Traction]

Then you have the hill up the Snow Shed on the Coquihalla Hwy, speed limit 110km/h, semis crawling up the right lane at 20km/h, regular cars on the middle lane going 80km/h, then drivers on the left lane with capable vehicles screaming up at 110-150.

Except for the Snow Shed, I aim for a minimum of 10km/h below the speed limit when going up hills on multi lane highways.

The truckers may have something to say about this idea.

So what do you think about the proposal to raise the limit to 120 for the Coquihalla and the Island Highway?

You know, I think the answer lies elsewhere than speed limits.  Our culture has this drive to go blasting long distances at high speeds.  (Oddly, at the same time we have motorcyclists and sports car drivers looking for narrow twisty roads.)  Recently I drove the Fraser Canyon as an alternative to the Coquihalla.   Though it took at least an hour longer, the Fraser Canyon was an enjoyable drive, while the Coq is either a (literally) crashing bore or a stressful chore.  The Coq is virtually bare of things of interest, while the Fraser Canyon has interesting things at every turn.  Many small businesses along the Fraser Canyon are boarded up because the Coquihalla siphons off all the traffic.  It seems to me that more modern highways with higher speed limits are not the wonderful benefit they were seen as, and in fact seem to lower the quality of our highway motoring.  Does anyone drive the Coquihalla just to go for a drive?  So be careful what you wish for.

[X-Traction]

Speed doesn't kill, or else all race car drivers would die in their first race

I don't think anyone here is stupid enough to mean that speed is the only contributing factor in accidents, and that a death is the result in all accidents.  Quibbling about semantics or verbal shortcuts is silly when everyone knows what the phrase means. 

Everyone also knows that speed is a contributing factor in many accidents.  Where there are differences of opinion lie in the situations where and the degree to which speed is a factor.

Computerized driver assistance systems will soon render all this moot anyway.

[Fobroader]

Yeah, but if you are not out for a fun sunday drive, a high speed autoroute is the way to go. Have a divided, 6 lane highway with 130-150km/h limit for people who are going somewhere and restricted back roads for people sight seeing.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Yeah, but if you are not out for a fun sunday drive, a high speed autoroute is the way to go. Have a divided, 6 lane highway with 130-150km/h limit for people who are going somewhere and restricted back roads for people sight seeing.

Aside from the safety argument, the other problem with having speeds running that fast is the increase in fuel consumption of 35-50%. If some people are doing it, not such a big deal. If most people are consuming that much extra, the price of fuel and the number of price spikes will increase substantially.

[dkaz]

Then you have the hill up the Snow Shed on the Coquihalla Hwy, speed limit 110km/h, semis crawling up the right lane at 20km/h, regular cars on the middle lane going 80km/h, then drivers on the left lane with capable vehicles screaming up at 110-150.

Except for the Snow Shed, I aim for a minimum of 10km/h below the speed limit when going up hills on multi lane highways.

The truckers may have something to say about this idea.

So what do you think about the proposal to raise the limit to 120 for the Coquihalla and the Island Highway?

You know, I think the answer lies elsewhere than speed limits.  Our culture has this drive to go blasting long distances at high speeds.  (Oddly, at the same time we have motorcyclists and sports car drivers looking for narrow twisty roads.)  Recently I drove the Fraser Canyon as an alternative to the Coquihalla.   Though it took at least an hour longer, the Fraser Canyon was an enjoyable drive, while the Coq is either a (literally) crashing bore or a stressful chore.  The Coq is virtually bare of things of interest, while the Fraser Canyon has interesting things at every turn.  Many small businesses along the Fraser Canyon are boarded up because the Coquihalla siphons off all the traffic.  It seems to me that more modern highways with higher speed limits are not the wonderful benefit they were seen as, and in fact seem to lower the quality of our highway motoring.  Does anyone drive the Coquihalla just to go for a drive?  So be careful what you wish for.

*minimum* this is going up hills. On flats, I tend to do the speed limit on multi lane highways, or 5-10 above on two lane highways. I do support raising the speed limits. I tend to keep my speed at a maximum of 105-110 for the purpose of saving fuel, but a higher speed limit will allow me to legally let my speed drift up going down hills.

BTW, it took me 14 hours to drive each way between Vancouver and Calgary, constantly needing to stop of the kids. I don't have the luxury of finding another hour to drive a nice scenic route at this point, because of anything that extra hour will become and extra hour and a half.

[blotter]

Computerized driver assistance systems will soon render all this moot anyway.

and then the computer will malfunction / gets errors / crash / get hacked......
that's when we'll say computers kill.

[mixmanmash]

only when i get the murderous feeling when stuck behind a slow poke in the left lane.   

You'll like this then:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZhdvl_P1Zc&feature=player_detailpage

[tpl]

Yeah, but if you are not out for a fun sunday drive, a high speed autoroute is the way to go. Have a divided, 6 lane highway with 130-150km/h limit for people who are going somewhere and restricted back roads for people sight seeing.

Aside from the safety argument, the other problem with having speeds running that fast is the increase in fuel consumption of 35-50%. If some people are doing it, not such a big deal. If most people are consuming that much extra, the price of fuel and the number of price spikes will increase substantially.

Given a high speed road I suspect it would have to have well enforced minimum speed limits  which one hopes would keep the slow people away from it.  Nothing wrong with a high speed road if it is well designed AND the people driving on it are going at close to the same speed.  That might mean that it either would have to be truck free or to have enough lanes so the trucks could have two dedicated lanes.   Just maybe the provinces could be persuaded to have serious driving tests....nahh  far to difficult they would lose votes.

Those who, as Fob says, have somewhere to go will not care about the fuel use nor the price.

[jamie1]

I would see fines for lifted trucks, vehicles with "lets pretend" HID headlights, blacken tail lights and also fine any shop that does this work to a vehicle intended for use on a public road.

[johngenx]

I would see fines for lifted trucks, vehicles with "lets pretend" HID headlights, blacken tail lights and also fine any shop that does this work to a vehicle intended for use on a public road.

Wait a minute?  You're in Edmonton?  Alberta?  Really?  Are you SURE you're an Albertan?  I thought I was the only one in the entire province that would do away with those things...

[jamie1]

I would see fines for lifted trucks, vehicles with "lets pretend" HID headlights, blacken tail lights and also fine any shop that does this work to a vehicle intended for use on a public road.

Wait a minute?  You're in Edmonton?  Alberta?  Really?  Are you SURE you're an Albertan?  I thought I was the only one in the entire province that would do away with those things...

I hate them. My shop does this work too and I have refused to do it. Funny thing is, I do most of our used car recon's and I remove the "lets pretend" HID's, window tinting and tinted lights and charge the UCD handsomely for it.