Should we do away with speed limits on our interurban motorways?

Enbee

It's been quite some time since I covered any kind of distance on the autobahns - not since I did a lot of hitching there in the 90s - but if memory serves the only sections that didn't have a limit were rural D3M sections. (I got a lift from Cologne to Frankfurt with a petrolhead banker who did a lot of the trip at 150-160 kmph.) I think most, if not all, D2M sections such as the A5 south of Karlsruhe to the Swiss border had a 120kmph limit.

It was a long time ago though!

Amtmann

Enbee wrote: »

It's been quite some time since I covered any kind of distance on the autobahns - not since I did a lot of hitching there in the 90s - but if memory serves the only sections that didn't have a limit were rural D3M sections. (I got a lift from Cologne to Frankfurt with a petrolhead banker who did a lot of the trip at 150-160 kmph.) I think most, if not all, D2M sections such as the A5 south of Karlsruhe to the Swiss border had a 120kmph limit.

It was a long time ago though!

No, now even two-lane autobahns are without a limit - many of them of inferior quality to new roads like the M8 and M6. The A9 (the Berlin to Munich road) through southern Thuringia for instance has no hard shoulders at all, yet the limit is 130.

The Dark Knight

Furet wrote: »

No, now even two-lane autobahns are without a limit - many of them of inferior quality to new roads like the M8 and M6. The A9 (the Berlin to Munich road) through southern Thuringia for instance has no hard shoulders at all, yet the limit is 130.

The Germans can drive though, and obey the rules-of-the-road.... Not like us Irish!!
Some might say that the M1 is already without a speed limit - especially if you drive a car with a Yellow Number Plate

KevR

paddyland wrote: »

The NRA appear to miss the point entirely about motorways. They should be primarily aimed at increasing the safety of journeys across medium to long distances. The situation which pertains with hundreds of idiots queued nose to tail in the centre lane in peak periods, with the first inside lane empty, completely negates any safety benefits, and in fact facilitates greater danger, with frustrated drivers taking chances undertaking and increased lane changing.

The NRA might as well not have bothered spending billions on third lanes, and given it to hospitals or something instead, if they cannot be bothered promoting safe and correct use of these new roads.

The RSA are missing the point too. Instead of wasting money on a sexist/ageist (and arguably pointless) campaign, they should spend the money on motorway conduct campaign.

Cheeble

Furet wrote: »

Should we do away with speed limits on our interurban motorways?

Why?

I don't think anybody's come up with a good reason yet.

Cheeble-eers

Lennoxschips

The Dark Knight wrote: »

The Germans can drive though, and obey the rules-of-the-road.... Not like us Irish!!
Some might say that the M1 is already without a speed limit - especially if you drive a car with a Yellow Number Plate

Most Germans can drive, but quite a substantial percentage of them drive very aggressively and dangerously, making driving in Germany a bad experience most of the time. The amount of high speed tailgating that goes on in that country is unbelievable.

murphaph

Lennoxschips wrote: »

Most Germans can drive, but quite a substantial percentage of them drive very aggressively and dangerously, making driving in Germany a bad experience most of the time. The amount of high speed tailgating that goes on in that country is unbelievable.

Couldn't agree more. My GF is terrible for aggressive driving (especially on the Autobahn). I keep telling her to chill out a bit but it's in one ear and out the other. I use public transport here but had to drive a large van last week to help someone move house and I was stressed to bits with it. And Berlin is relatively laid back, it's worse in other cities.

Amtmann

Indeed. When I was there there was a mega pile up on one of the autobahns near Berlin I think - a ridiculous number of vehicles were involved. I think the fact that there are so many trucks and campervans on the autobahns makes tailgating more dangerous. Very fast-moving traffic can be forced to slow down dramatically in seconds. We don't have capacity issues like that here yet though, and probably never will.

KevR

Furet wrote: »

When I was there there was a mega pile up on one of the autobahns near Berlin I think - a ridiculous number of vehicles were involved.

Type 'motorway pile up' into the search bar and I think that's the 259 car autobahn pile up you are talking about. :eek:

adamski8

dwtsot wrote: »

3: The driver who drives at 120kph on the outside lane and ignores everyone else because they shouldn't be going faster than that anyway. Grow up! It's not your responsibility to police others. By doing what you are doing you are in effect the only driver doing something wrong.

How is that doing something wrong? Im sick of being pressured into breaking the speed limit by tailgaters when im travelling 120km/hr while passing people going 100km/hr. maybe not everyone is trying to police you :rolleyes:

corktina

adamski8 wrote: »

How is that doing something wrong? Im sick of being pressured into breaking the speed limit by tailgaters when im travelling 120km/hr while passing people going 100km/hr. maybe not everyone is trying to police you :rolleyes:

its not wrong so long as you move over as soon as you can after passing the slower vehicle.
Unfortunately there are loads of amateur policemen out there, I meet them everyday and Im convinced that they think that there speedo is spot-on correct and that noone should be going faster than them. What I find they usually do as soon as i DO pass them, is speed up to get in front again and then slow down again.

corktina

corktina wrote: »

its not wrong so long as you move over as soon as you can after passing the slower vehicle.
Unfortunately there are loads of amateur policemen out there, I meet them everyday and Im convinced that they think that there speedo is spot-on correct and that noone should be going faster than them. What I find they usually do as soon as i DO pass them, is speed up to get in front again and then slow down again.

I often find that I'm going along at a steady 75-80mph (UK car) and will slowly catch up with the car in front, so I pull out to overtake.
It's annoying just how many times that car will speed up as I'm passing, on one occasion last week it sped up to 95 before lettiing me pass! :mad:

What are they trying to prove!

corktina

oh they prove it very well...although they dont need to, we all KNOW they are pratts...

Quint

The right hand lane hoggers would ruin it. Take a drive down the M50, the left lane (not left turning lane) is almost empty, people have a phobia about driving in it.

Quint

Quint wrote: »

The right hand lane hoggers would ruin it. Take a drive down the M50, the left lane (not left turning lane) is almost empty, people have a phobia about driving in it.

I often have lane one to myself!

Reg'stoy

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

I think 150 would be a good speed. Very fast, but not stupidly so. The last time I was in Germany I got a taxi, and the driver was going 175 at night in the rain.

The scary part was the speed with which the metre went up.

Who else thinks that the above statement is proof alone that our limits are high enough, where as our education as to road safety seems to be somewhat lacking in certain areas.

101sean

Another problem with the righteous lane hoggers who think they are policing the limit is that they aren't. Most car speedos over - read by around 5%, so 120 shows up at around 114, check it out against a GPS

xabi

101sean wrote: »

Another problem with the righteous lane hoggers who think they are policing the limit is that they aren't. Most car speedos over - read by around 5%, so 120 shows up at around 114, check it out against a GPS

Most cars i have driven the speedo reads under compared to the GPS.

101sean

Think thats what I was trying to say (not very well!) They think they are doing 120 but are actually doing 6kph less.

Zoney

Far more dangerous than lane hoggers are the kind of people who usually want to pass them - tailgating at 120 km/h +, and not just too short a stopping distance but literally a couple feet from the car in front. Brain dead morons with complete ignorance of even basic physics and indeed manners too (and yes, the true test of manners even on the road is how you show them to those who are not behaving properly themselves).

Capt'n Midnight

Quint wrote: »

Take a drive down the M50, the left lane (not left turning lane) is almost empty, people have a phobia about driving in it.

This is so bad that on the M7 Southbound you could remove the hard shoulder and just use the left lane instead.

The cost of providing the unused left lanes on our motorways would probably pay for decent public transport infrastructure in Dublin

The Dark Knight

Zoney wrote: »

Far more dangerous than lane hoggers are the kind of people who usually want to pass them - tailgating at 120 km/h +, and not just too short a stopping distance but literally a couple feet from the car in front. Brain dead morons with complete ignorance of even basic physics and indeed manners too (and yes, the true test of manners even on the road is how you show them to those who are not behaving properly themselves).

Totally agree.... People even tailgate when you are clearly passing a slower car.

While I totally agree that lane hogging is wrong.... their sin is being compounded by reckless tailgaters.

Amtmann

Wow the NO vote has made up a lot of ground here. Some good arguments have been made against raising the limits.

corktina

of copurse removing the speed limit would get rid of the amateur poilice...











...perhaps

nordydan

xabi wrote: »

Most cars i have driven the speedo reads under compared to the GPS.

Agreed, my speedo reads about 7-8% higher than the GPS speed. Which in my case means that I always compensate even when the GPS is not in use (i.e I know that 130km/hr on the speedo is actually the 120km/hr limit of the motorway.

Furet wrote: »

Wow the NO vote has made up a lot of ground here. Some good arguments have been made against raising the limits.

I think a lot of the arguments are about bad driving practice.
I think that before driving tests are being done that everyone should have to spend at hour on the motorway with an instructor being shown proper motorway driving etiquette (i.e. not driving themselves but actually showing how to overtake, stay left etc). and ALSO pointing out bad driving from others where noted (examples noted above).

nordydan

nordydan wrote: »

I think a lot of the arguments are about bad driving practice.
I think that before driving tests are being done that everyone should have to spend at hour on the motorway with an instructor being shown proper motorway driving etiquette (i.e. not driving themselves but actually showing how to overtake, stay left etc). and ALSO pointing out bad driving from others where noted (examples noted above).

Have to agree, bad driving habits will just make the "mess" worse.
Unfortunately, there are too many experienced drivers who have "burnt in" bad habits to make any unlimited roads more dangerous.

Upping the limit to 140 (with 120 in the wet) would be a sensible comprimise.

The Dark Knight

Deleted User wrote: »

Have to agree, bad driving habits will just make the "mess" worse.
Unfortunately, there are too many experienced drivers who have "burnt in" bad habits to make any unlimited roads more dangerous.

Upping the limit to 140 (with 120 in the wet) would be a sensible comprimise.

Personally i think 120kph in the wet is too high.
In France the speed limits are 130kph in Dry; 110kph in Wet (110 and 100 on DC's). Even 110 in the wet can be too high. Ideally variable speed limits should be implemented on all M roads.

Empire o de Sun

I agree the 120 km/h limit is too high in the rain.

Speed limits should drop by 20 on motorways when is is raining.

but maybe a speed of 130 or 140 km/h

but if there were no speed limits than people would drive at what they are comfortable at. That fact is it a limit means to allot of people they should drive atleast or faster.

As long as the motorway had 3.75 m lanes adequate sightlines for 200 km/h I see no reason why not other than culteral reasons of if you give it to them they'll abuse it.

marious

to apply higher speed limit (IMAO):

1.get rid of L drivers, they exist on motorways as you know and nobody is doing anything about it(gardai).

2.do something with tractors ?!?! on our motorways

3.RE educate people about using lanes on motorways and INDICATING

4.RE educate people that hard shoulder on motorway isn't parking for answering mobile phone

5.RE educate people of importance of using dipped headlights as some people switching them on only when they don't see the road ?!?!

6.RE educate people that when they joining traffic they MUST give way to people using left lane! and indicate

7.Educate people that when they driving on left lane, want to overtake somebody and see in the mirror car approaching on fast lane with great speed 200m behind them to WAIT till he'll pass them first, not forcing him and probably cars behind him to brake suddenly

8.Educate people that when they using full lights they're dazzling incoming traffic and cars in front of them AS WELL (up to 300-400m), and to switch fog lights off

thank you

Zoney

marious:

You forgot tailgaters - and at motorway speeds that means more than just bumper to bumper.