New proposed 30km/h speed limits-"Consultation"?

2RockMountain

Zipppy wrote: »

It is extremely difficult to drive a modern car at 30kph...regardless of people saying 'oh you've got a big car so you should be allowed to drive faster' the reality is it IS very difficult. Drivers will spend lots of their concentration watching the speedo trying to keep speed down and now paying attention to the road.

Don't most modern cars, especially bigger cars, have speed limiters as part of the cruise control? My 2010 car does, and it ain't a particularly fancy car.

frozenfrozen

Speed limits generally aren't followed unless there is a gosafe van up the road. In my opinion 30km/h limits only justify the serial speeders deciding what speed they will actually do. If all zones were set appropriately and policed, then maybe the zones where it is really necessary to only do exactly 30km/h at the maximum, would be followed.

From my own experience of the 30km/h limit in limerick at the quay, it is dangerous because people will very aggressively overtake, which ends up being much more dangerous than people driving there at 50km/h.

These 30k limits unless heavily policed will in my opinion endanger fully compliant drivers, and in a lot of cases just convert them to deciding their own speed limits..

magicbastarder

Zipppy wrote: »

It is extremely difficult to drive a modern car at 30kph

i strongly suspect the difficulty for most people is not the size of the engine or the age of the car, but purely a psychological difficulty. i was out in the car yesterday, and checked what gear best suits 30km/h - it's a petrol octavia, and was pulling around 1750RPM in third. the car had no difficulty with that, the main difficulty is seeing an open road in front of you and resisting the urge to speed up because that's what you usually do in that situation.

galwaycyclist

magicbastarder wrote: »

i strongly suspect the difficulty for most people is not the size of the engine or the age of the car, but purely a psychological difficulty. i was out in the car yesterday, and checked what gear best suits 30km/h - it's a petrol octavia, and was pulling around 1750RPM in third. the car had no difficulty with that, the main difficulty is seeing an open road in front of you and resisting the urge to speed up because that's what you usually do in that situation.

Exactly the problem is not the car it is that some people don't understand what the gear box is for.

Dravokivich

People complaint about maintaining speed are seriously missing something. I've only been driving about 3 months. My issue with speed management in this country is going between areas where it's 100 then drops to 50. It's crazy and should be much more gradual.

It's not difficult to keep to a required speed once it's possible to attain it safely. Anyone who speeds be used no one else keeps to the limit are just furthering a self fulfilled prophecy. It's nuts driving along the quays in Dublin because no one cares about the other road users. They are just thinking what they can do and not what they should do.

ezra_pound

TheExile1878 wrote: »

Told you.

"Bikes good. Cars bad. Ug"

No. It's speeding cars residential areas and areas large amounts of pedestrians kill.

I think you misunderstand the point. It's not about good and bad or good and evil. The fact is that cars kill hundreds people every year. In housing estates and in city centres. There's no need for a car to be doing more than 30 k in housing estate or city centre.

2RockMountain

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Exactly the problem is not the car it is that some people don't understand what the gear box is for.

And most don't understand how the speed limiter works.

Captain Chaos

2RockMountain wrote: »

And most don't understand how the speed limiter works.

Most cars don't have them.

The biggest problem with driving at 30 in an area like the city centre is that pedestrians and cyclists become even more wreckless in walking out infront of anything. You have to drive around with your foot covering the brake constantly as people in general don't hear or see you with their heads in their phones, cyclists are overtaking me doing 30, the rules should apply to them too. At least at 50 or so you appear as a threat to their well being and they stand back.

2RockMountain

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Most cars don't have them.

The biggest problem with driving at 30 in an area like the city centre is that pedestrians and cyclists become even more wreckless in walking out infront of anything. You have to drive around with your foot covering the brake constantly as people in general don't hear or see you with their heads in their phones, cyclists are overtaking me doing 30, the rules should apply to them too. At least at 50 or so you appear as a threat to their well being and they stand back.

Lots of cars do have them, though the drivers don't know about it, because they've never looked through the manual for their cruise control to find it. I have a limiter on my 2010 yoke, and it was by no means top of the range when it was made.

There are very few cyclists doing 30kmph steadily in the city. A good cyclist might do this on a country road, having built up a bit of momentum, but in a stop/start city, it is unusual enough to go over 30 kmph on a bike for any significant period, unless you have a good downhill or a very strong wind behind you.

If you need to rely on scaring people to drive safely, you need to change your driving style.

NiallBoo

2RockMountain wrote: »

There are very few cyclists doing 30kmph steadily in the city. A good cyclist might do this on a country road, having built up a bit of momentum, but in a stop/start city, it is unusual enough to go over 30 kmph on a bike for any significant period, unless you have a good downhill or a very strong wind behind you.

If you need to rely on scaring people to drive safely, you need to change your driving style.

I don't think you're comparing like-for-like here. It's difficult to get much above a 20kmh average cycling through the city* but doing 30 when actually moving is pretty normal.

That's stop-start with frequent breaks and completely different to averaging 30kmh over 100k.

*following the rules etc.

magicbastarder

Captain Chaos wrote: »

cyclists are overtaking me doing 30, the rules should apply to them too.

why?
cyclists doing say 35km/h - assuming they are not violating any laws - are carrying nowhere near as much momentum or kinetic energy as a car doing the same speed. combining my weight and my bike's weight, comes in at under 100KG. combining my weight and my car's, comes in at over 1,500KG - so over 15 times the momentum or kinetic energy.

magicbastarder

NiallBoo wrote: »

averaging 30kmh over 100k.

off topic, but being able to average 30km/h over 100km is quite an achievement!
i'd be reasonably fit and would not be able to average that over 20km.

NiallBoo

magicbastarder wrote: »

off topic, but being able to average 30km/h over 100km is quite an achievement!
i'd be reasonably fit and would not be able to average that over 20km.

Totally, i couldn't either - that's my point - that speed over a short distance is pretty handy (like between traffic lights) and doesn't compare to the kind of speeds you do during a weekend cycle

trellheim

I am not sure what behavioural change it will make though; take Rathmines or Wexford St , both badly need it but in fact are usually jammed.

SantryRed

What's the reasoning behind the change? Dublin is relatively safe compared to other parts of the country? What's the benefit making Santry 30kph or places like it? The city one doesn't matter because it's rare you get up speed much any way with all the lights, but this decision is just baffling.

Some form of money making racket?

magicbastarder

Deedsie wrote: »

Better for the environment, low revs less fossil fuel burned.

not necessarily so. cars generally do best in terms of fuel efficiency in their top gear at the lowest revs which does not cause engine strain.
i.e. to take an extreme example, you're way better off for fuel consumption doing 2k revs in 5th than you are in 1st.

beauf

magicbastarder wrote: »

not necessarily so. cars generally do best in terms of fuel efficiency in their top gear at the lowest revs which does not cause engine strain.
i.e. to take an extreme example, you're way better off for fuel consumption doing 2k revs in 5th than you are in 1st.

Wind resistance and drag comes into it a lot more.

work

magicbastarder wrote: »

not necessarily so. cars generally do best in terms of fuel efficiency in their top gear at the lowest revs which does not cause engine strain.
i.e. to take an extreme example, you're way better off for fuel consumption doing 2k revs in 5th than you are in 1st.

Point taken however I would believe the least "friendly" (in terms of environmental emissions and lack of fuel efficiency) form of driving is that of maximum acceleration and deceleration. Surely with limits of 30km/Hr this would reduce this significantly over that of 50km/Hr. I doubt hardly anyone in the city center ever reaches 5th or 6th gear.

magicbastarder

beauf wrote: »

Wind resistance and drag comes into it a lot more.

not enough to make doing 2000 revs in fifth less efficient than the same in third.

magicbastarder

work wrote: »

Point taken however I would believe the least "friendly" (in terms of environmental emissions and lack of fuel efficiency) form of driving is that of maximum acceleration and deceleration. Surely with limits of 30km/Hr this would reduce this significantly over that of 50km/Hr. I doubt hardly anyone in the city center ever reaches 5th or 6th gear.

i suspect this is one of those 'it's complicated' situations. very much depends on circumstances - the driving style of the driver, how 'open' the roads are in terms of distances between junctions, etc. - but yes, the speed you'd regularly travel in the city centre would make a 50km/h or 30km/h speed limit moot.

LeChienMefiant

Via Broadsheet.ie http://www.broadsheet.ie/2016/07/18/de-monday-papers-154/

http://www.thesun.ie/irishsol/homepage/news/7213618/Ronan-2-killed-as-he-chased-his-ball.html

TheSun.ie wrote:

But Cllr Logue revealed she had recently contacted transport officials over safety concerns about the stretch of road.

She said: “I only wrote to Transport NI about traffic calming measures just two weeks ago.

“There are lots of cars on that road. I don’t know if the measures would have made a difference in this tragic case but it is something that needs to be looked at.”

monument

SantryRed wrote: »

What's the reasoning behind the change? Dublin is relatively safe compared to other parts of the country? What's the benefit making Santry 30kph or places like it? The city one doesn't matter because it's rare you get up speed much any way with all the lights, but this decision is just baffling.

Some form of money making racket?

Santry isn't planned as part of the upcoming phases and if/when Santry comes up it will exclude the main roads in Santry.

30km/h is standard in a large amount of residential areas across Europe... What do you fine baffling about it?

beauf

magicbastarder wrote: »

not enough to make doing 2000 revs in fifth less efficient than the same in third.

Sorry my post was cut off. I meant to say that at higher speeds drag is a major factor.

Driving the BMW at 75 mph in fourth gear yielded 26.4 mpg. In sixth gear at the same speed, it got 29.7 mpg, a 12.5-percent improvement.

In the above example at 75 mph and in sixth gear, the BMW achieved 29.7 mpg. I dropped to 65 mph, and the fuel consumption also fell, to 33.6. If you're really into rubbing pennies, going even slower will pay more dividends. At 55 mph, the BMW behaved like an economy car and achieved 37.9 mpg.

http://www.caranddriver.com/columns/driving-for-fuel-economy

Its mostly irrelevant for urban driving. So sorry for the derail.

That said if you are driving in these urban areas, all the stop starting you are doing will be the main impact on fuel economy. Only made worse by braking from, and accelerating to higher speeds, then coming to a stop. The more you use the brake and accelerator the worse it will be.

magicbastarder

beauf wrote: »

Sorry my post was cut off. I meant to say that at higher speeds drag is a major factor.

yep, i think i remember hearing that of the 1000 horsepower the bugatti veyron has, only the first 200 or so are required to get it to 150mph; the other 800 horsepower is needed to get it from 150mph to 240mph.

magicbastarder

it was to clarify a point made about fuel efficiency, rather than a statement on driving in suburban areas.

Fian

I expect, since they have gone to public consultation on this proposal, there is a strong chance of it being implemented. I think a 30km/h speed limit inside the canals would be really beneficial for the city. It baffles me sometimes to see cars accelerating as quick as they can to reach the back of the queue at the next traffic lights. If cars travel at 30km/h inside the canals it will have no more than a minor effect on total journey times.

I expect the speed limit will be broken but the reduced limit will still have an impact on average speeds.

deandean

I am very skeptical about these public consultation processes. I reckon the decision is already made, and the announcement about public consultation is purely to provide an avenue (leading to a shredder) for concerned citizens to lodge their observations.

bpb101

didnt see this thread before , but heard of the plans. its a mad idea really.

We need reasonable sensible and when you go over that speed limit , to have it enforced.

If its 30 , cyclist should have to obey this as well

magicbastarder

bpb101 wrote: »

If its 30 , cyclist should have to obey this as well

why?

NiallBoo

magicbastarder wrote: »

bpb101 wrote: »

If its 30 , cyclist should have to obey this as well

why?

There isn't a practical reason - a cyclist breaking the speed limit can't cause even 1/10th the amount of damage.

...but I still think it would be a good idea to put bikes on the same level to help get at least some good will from motorists and avoid "why just me? What about that guy? " type arguments.