[GG66]

90 100 very long (dangerous)

Guess that's why most people will always break the speed limit while overtaking at these speeds. It's probably safer to overtake at a faster speed more quickly than keep within the limit and wait for on coming traffic

Where did you get these figures from?

[colm_mcm]

Originally Posted by GG66

Where did you get these figures from?

I'd say he got them off his website

[DrivingInfo]

Ok you’re missing the point.

Its not about the figures, its about speeding when overtaking.
So what you are saying! In your mind its safer to speed than stay behind a car.

[maidhc]

Why must all these threads descend to this level. Its pathetic.

[I.S.T.]

Originally Posted by GG66

I was with someone today who got a speeding ticket for being clocked at 130kph (80mph) while overtaking a motorcycle and a car.

It was long stretch of road with no visible oncoming traffic. Both vehicles which were overtaken were travelling under the speed limit.

Made me think, seems a bit harsh, surely you have to speed to overtake and then is it not in your interest to overtake quickly. Garda says they usually all 10% over speed limit for overtaking..........

Common sense will tell you to overtake as quickly as you can. Being on the wrong site of the road is more dangerous than speeding. Unfortunatly they can and will do you for breaking the speed limit while overtaking. Technically it is against the law. Please fill in the location of the speed trap if you get a chance... http://www.irishspeedtraps.com/mapinput.aspx

[Longrangedriver]

Originally Posted by DrivingInfo

Ok you’re missing the point.

Its not about the figures, its about speeding when overtaking.
So what you are saying! In your mind its safer to speed than stay behind a car.

If a car is doing example; 70-80 in 100, or 50-70 in 80 with fluctuating speeds its probably better to be way ahead of these drivers.

(a) they generally don't help keep a good flow of traffic
(b) are bound to do something silly, eg jam on and then indicate or pull out on to main road and drive slow with cars approaching their rear at the speed limit

So I'd have to agree with colm_mcm, as I do 60k+ km p/annum I see this all the time and it seems to affect most drivers around. Its better to continue on a journey with a clear head than be concentrating on trying to get past these drivers. Those do-gooders sitting in offices wouldn't see this or the affects to most drivers.

[BostonB]

You can argue semantics all day. But in the present climate of zero tolerance you'll get done for speeding if your caught over the limit. Its up to you if you think its worth all the hassle to overtake by speeding and fighting it if caught.

[lassykk]

I get annoyed by drivers who are going slower than I'd like. In a 100kmph zone (conditions allowing) I usually travel at an indicated speed of 110kmph. I know that my speedo overstates mileage, and that a Garda wouldn't stop me for being 1 or 2 kmph over the limit.
If a driver is doing an indicated 95 kmph and is slowing down and speeding up all the time, I don't wanna be behind him.

couldn't agree with you more. There's nothing more annoying than people who drive at 80kmph when its safe to do 100kmph but not safe to pass them and then as soon as the straight road where it is safe to pass they accelerate to 100kmph meaning that its not legal to overtake them.

I'm all for safer driving, it just bugs me that the Gardai always seem to be present on the best parts of our road network....while the minor roads provide more serious dangers

This annoys me so much about Irish roads. I live on a narrow country road where the legal limit is a ridiculous 80kmph. It should be lower as there as people regularly walk it, its not wide enough for 2 vehicles and its used to cut between 2 main roads to avoid traffic.

Now I'm not trying to start an arguement about the speed limits in this country as everyone could vent for ages about that but what I do have a problem with is guards laying in wait on 100kmph straight stretches of major roads. I'm not condoning breaking the speed limit but the focus should be on where roads are of poorer condition and breaking the speed limit is far more dangerous than on a straight stretch of a primary route. Can someone explain this? Is just a money making scheme that guards sit on the new ross - wexford road on the straighest, widest & therefore safest part and ignore more dangerous areas of minor roads.

Im genuinely asking this question i'm not just trying to provoke a reaction from everyone. It baffles me and has done for the 5 years I've been driving.

[BostonB]

You don't need an answer to that. But to humour you.

1) People who drive dangerously, also do it on good roads. It habitual.
2) Presence and frequent convictions are intended to change peoples habits.
3) Catching more people re: non dangerous speeding, helps with point (2)
4) Peoples abilities range widely. The limits are a reflection of that.
5) Yes the limits are often inappropriate making point (4) is null and void. But see point (2)

[Stark]

Is there any evidence to support No. 2?

I've been in the UK and NI. They've a comprehensive speed camera network that seems to keep speeds somewhat under control where they're deployed (although I've noticed a load of NI drivers seem to happily ignore them for some reason, maybe they know a lot of them are duds or something). Anytime I've driven up North, I've constantly had drivers zooming past me on roads that make much of our network look like superhighway, and that's with me doing at least the speed limit. Exact same situation in the UK, where it seems almost obligatory to do 20mph over the speed limit. Obviously, the high prescence does nothing to change driver attitudes there, it just seems to make them more eager to drive like maniacs when they're on roads without cameras.

[BostonB]

Often popular perception is more influential than the truth. So it seems to be with speed cameras.

Wait till you see the sudden braking that goes on in the UK where they go mad with cameras and enforcement.

[lassykk]

@ BostonB

tank u so much for humouring me by the way. i feel privileged

1) People who drive dangerously, also do it on good roads. It habitual.
2) Presence and frequent convictions are intended to change peoples habits.
3) Catching more people re: non dangerous speeding, helps with point (2)
4) Peoples abilities range widely. The limits are a reflection of that.
5) Yes the limits are often inappropriate making point (4) is null and void. But see point (2)

Presence and frequent convictions are intended to change people's habits yeah & people who drive dangerous also do it on good roads. That's BS for a start.

Recently a stretch of national primary route was reclassified from a 100 kmph zone to 50 kmph zone to allow for slow moving vehicles whilst a new ring road/bridge is being built in the waterford area. As a result the volume of vehicles on my road has at least doubled as you can avoid the 50 zone and enter an 80 zone by cutting by my house as i alluded to in my earlier post. These people are intentionally avoiding the 50 kmph zone (which is a ridiculous limit but off point) by passing by my house. In my lifetime I have never seen a police car, marked or unmarked on my road enforcing the speed limit (excessive as it is) but I have seen a speed check on the new 50 kmph zone on the primary route 4 times since its introduction. All the convictions in the world on that stretch of road are just going to send more and more people onto my road and roads similar to mine where people know they can speed without fear of reprisal from the guards.

The people who are cutting onto my road are regular commuters from all walks of life not just boy racers and the vast majority are driving dangerously on my road. These people would not necessarily be driving dangerously if left on the primary route at the old 100 kmph limit

Catching more people helps with point 2. Yes, if point 2 were valid. I its clear point 2 has little or no effect with regard minor roads as they aren't patrolled.

And yes I am aware I am referring to "my road" throughout this post. I'm just using it as an example. I'm aware that slieverue isn't the centre of the universe (yet) but I am just illustrating a point before I get shot down for focusing on one tiny stretch of road.

[BostonB]

Nice rant.

I never said point (2) was true or false. Just that it exists, and is a reason for speed trap locations which were baffling you. A better question might be who sets the limits, their locations, and by what rational. How can you get the limits changed. You could ask the same of the speed trap locations, especially if you feel it would help in your area.

[MrPudding]

Originally Posted by GG66

Garda said he was driving dangerously overtaking a car and a bike at once,

Christ, another one that thinks you can only safely overtake one vehicle at a time.

MrP

[Marcus.Aurelius]

Gah, another hop hop advocate! I don't even think its worth explaining again MrP.